CVE-2019-18241
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 · uneditedIn Philips IntelliBridge EC40 and EC80, IntelliBridge EC40 Hub all versions, and IntelliBridge EC80 Hub all versions, the SSH server running on the affected products is configured to allow weak ciphers. This could enable an unauthorized attacker with access to the network to capture and replay the session and gain unauthorized access to the EC40/80 hub.
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 confidenceThe Philips IntelliBridge EC40 and EC80 hub devices run an SSH server configured to accept weak cryptographic ciphers. An attacker with network access to the affected products could perform capture and replay attacks on SSH sessions to intercept credentials and gain unauthorized access to the hub.
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 dataall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 device modelCheck the physical device label or access the device management interface to confirm the model is Philips IntelliBridge EC40 or EC80Affected if Device is an EC40 or EC80 hub
-
Verify SSH is enabledCheck if the SSH service is running on the device or if port 22 is accessible from the networkAffected if SSH is enabled and accessible on the network
-
Inspect SSH server configurationAccess the device's SSH daemon configuration file (typically /etc/ssh/sshd_config) and review the Ciphers and MACs directivesAffected if Weak ciphers (such as 3des-cbc, aes128-cbc) or weak MAC algorithms (such as hmac-md5, hmac-sha1) are listed or if no strong cipher restrictions are configured
-
Check SSH banner and supported ciphersUse an SSH client or network scanner (e.g., nmap with ssh2-enum-algos script) to connect to the device and list the supported algorithmsAffected if Weak ciphers or MACs appear in the list of supported algorithms returned by the server
-
Review authentication logsExamine SSH authentication logs for signs of credential interception or suspicious session activityAffected if Unexpected session behavior or replay indicators are observed (for informational context)
The device is affected if it is a Philips IntelliBridge EC40 or EC80 with SSH enabled and the SSH server accepts weak cryptographic ciphers.
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 dataDisable weak ciphers and mac algorithms on the SSH server configuration, ensuring only strong (e.g., AES-256, SHA-2) ciphers are permitted. Coordinate with Philips for approved configuration changes and validate changes in a test environment before production deployment.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,184.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-18241 — 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-2019-18241 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