CVE-2019-19277
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 has been identified in SIPORT MP (All versions < 3.1.4). Vulnerable versions of the device allow the creation of special accounts ("service users") with administrative privileges that could enable a remote authenticated attacker to perform actions that are not visible to other users of the system, such as granting persons access to a secured area.
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 · moderate confidenceSIPORT MP versions before 3.1.4 contain a privilege escalation vulnerability where authenticated attackers can create hidden administrative 'service user' accounts that are invisible to other system users, allowing unauthorized physical access to secured areas.
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< 3.1.4CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 installed Siport MP versionAccess the Siport MP system administration panel or check the application version information in the software About section. If you have command-line access, use the system's version check command or examine the software build information file.Affected if The installed version is any version before 3.1.4 (e.g., 3.1.3, 3.0.x, 2.x)
-
Review user account list for hidden service accountsLog in with administrative privileges and navigate to the user management or account administration section. Examine all user accounts, paying particular attention to accounts labeled as 'service user' type. Compare this list against the total user count visible to other standard users.Affected if There exist service user accounts with administrative privileges that are not visible to or manageable by other standard administrative users in the system
-
Cross-check user visibility across different accountsLog out and log back in with different administrative credentials (or a standard user account). Compare the user list visible from this perspective against the list seen from the primary administrator account.Affected if Some privileged accounts (especially service user accounts) appear in one administrative view but are absent from another user account's view of the same system
-
Inspect service user account creation logsCheck the Siport MP audit logs or event logs for any user account creation events, particularly those involving service user accounts, that occurred without corresponding actions from known administrators.Affected if There are records of service user account creation events that were not initiated by recognized system administrators
-
Verify physical access permissionsReview the physical access permissions assigned to all user accounts, especially any service user accounts, to confirm which accounts can grant physical entry to secured areas.Affected if There are service user accounts with physical access permissions to secured areas that are not visible in the standard user management interface
You are affected if your Siport MP version is before 3.1.4 AND you discover hidden or invisible service user accounts with administrative or physical access permissions that were not created by known administrators.
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 data3.1.4
Upgrade SIPORT MP to version 3.1.4 or later to remediate this vulnerability. Review existing user accounts for unauthorized service accounts.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-19277 — 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-2019-19277 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