CVE-2019-1732
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 Remote Package Manager (RPM) subsystem of Cisco NX-OS Software could allow an authenticated, local attacker with administrator credentials to leverage a time-of-check, time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition to corrupt local variables, which could lead to arbitrary command injection. The vulnerability is due to the lack of a proper locking mechanism on critical variables that need to stay static until used. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by authenticating to an affected device and issuing a set of RPM-related CLI commands. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to perform arbitrary command injection. The attacker would need administrator credentials for the targeted device.
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 TOCTOU race condition in the Remote Package Manager (RPM) subsystem of Cisco NX-OS Software allows an authenticated local attacker with administrator credentials to corrupt local variables due to lack of proper locking mechanisms, leading to arbitrary command injection.
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>= 7.0\(3\)i4, < 7.0\(3\)i7\(4\)>= 7.0\(3\), < 7.0\(3\)f3\(5\)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
- Local
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Check Cisco NX-OS versionRun 'show version' on the NX-OS device and locate the 'NXOS' version lineAffected if The version falls within 7.0(3)i4 through 7.0(3)i7(3) or 7.0(3) through 7.0(3)f3(4)
-
Verify RPM feature statusRun 'show feature | include rpm' to see if the Remote Package Manager feature is enabledAffected if The RPM feature is listed as enabled (status = enabled)
-
Check for RPM command executionReview command history logs or run 'show logging log | include RPM' to inspect recent RPM CLI operationsAffected if RPM commands have been executed on the system
-
Review administrator access logsCheck authentication logs for administrator-level logins using 'show logging log | include admin' or similarAffected if Multiple or suspicious administrator sessions are observed alongside RPM usage
The environment is affected if the NX-OS version is within the vulnerable range AND the RPM feature is enabled, since the race condition only manifests when RPM commands are processed.
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 data7.0
Apply the Cisco NX-OS software update that addresses this vulnerability. Until patched, strictly limit administrative access and monitor for suspicious RPM CLI command sequences.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1732 — 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-2019-1732 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