Identity Services EngineApplication · Cisco
CVE-2019-1718
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA vulnerability in the web interface of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to trigger high CPU usage, resulting in a denial of service (DoS) condition. The vulnerability is due to improper handling of Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) renegotiation requests. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending renegotiation requests at a high rate. An successful exploit could increase the resource usage on the system, eventually leading to a DoS condition. This vulnerability affects version 2.1.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA vulnerability in Cisco ISE web interface allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to cause denial of service by sending SSL renegotiation requests at a high rate, leading to excessive CPU usage. The root cause is improper handling of SSL renegotiation requests.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Identity Services EngineApplication
= 2.1\(0.907\)CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if Cisco ISE is installedCheck for Cisco ISE processes or services running on the system. On the ISE appliance, run 'show version' in the CLI or check the admin web UI login page for ISE branding.Affected if The system is running Cisco Identity Services Engine software.
-
Verify the exact Cisco ISE versionIn the ISE CLI, execute 'show version' and look for the version string. In the web UI, navigate to Administration > System > Settings > About Cisco ISE to view the exact build version.Affected if The version displayed is exactly 2.1(0.907).
-
Confirm the ISE admin web interface is accessibleAttempt to access the Cisco ISE admin portal URL (typically https://<ise-hostname>/admin) from a network location or verify the SSL service is listening on port 443.Affected if The ISE web interface responds to HTTP/HTTPS requests, meaning it is network-reachable.
You are affected if you have Cisco ISE version 2.1(0.907) running and its admin web interface is accessible over the network, as this specific version contains the SSL renegotiation flaw.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the Cisco patch for CVE-2019-1718 (upgrade from ISE 2.1 to a patched version). Consider implementing rate limiting on SSL/TLS connections at upstream network devices as a temporary mitigation.
Fix this in Identity Services Engine
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1718 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-1718 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data