CVE-2019-19326
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 · uneditedSilverstripe CMS sites through 4.4.4 which have opted into HTTP Cache Headers on responses served by the framework's HTTP layer can be vulnerable to web cache poisoning. Through modifying the X-Original-Url and X-HTTP-Method-Override headers, responses with malicious HTTP headers can return unexpected responses to other consumers of this cached response. Most other headers associated with web cache poisoning are already disabled through request hostname forgery whitelists.
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 confidenceSilverstripe CMS versions through 4.4.4 with HTTP Cache Headers enabled are vulnerable to web cache poisoning. Attackers can manipulate X-Original-Url and X-HTTP-Method-Override headers to inject malicious HTTP headers into cached responses, causing subsequent visitors to receive poisoned responses.
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>= 3.0.0, < 3.7.5>= 4.0.0, < 4.4.7>= 4.5.0, < 4.5.4CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 Silverstripe CMS versionLocate the version file in your Silverstripe installation (typically silverstripe/version.php or composer.json), or access /admin and check the CMS version displayed in the footerAffected if version is >= 3.0.0 and < 3.7.5, OR >= 4.0.0 and < 4.4.7, OR >= 4.5.0 and < 4.5.4
-
Verify HTTP Cache Headers are enabledCheck your Silverstripe configuration files (mysite/_config.php, app/_config.php, or any YAML config files in app/_config/) for HTTP cache header settings. Look for directives like 'HTTP.enableCache' or similar cache configuration. Also inspect response headers from your site to see if caching headers (Cache-Control, X-Cache, etc.) are presentAffected if HTTP Cache Headers feature is enabled in the configuration
-
Check for vulnerable header handlingInspect your web server logs or request headers for usage of X-Original-Url and X-HTTP-Method-Override headers. These headers are accepted by Silverstripe when caching is enabled and can be manipulated to poison cachesAffected if Your application accepts and processes X-Original-Url or X-HTTP-Method-Override headers through the caching layer
You are affected if your Silverstripe version falls within the vulnerable ranges AND HTTP Cache Headers are enabled, allowing attackers to manipulate cache via X-Original-Url or X-HTTP-Method-Override headers.
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 data3.7.54.4.74.5.4
Disable HTTP Cache Headers in the Silverstripe configuration, or upgrade to version 4.4.5 or later which patches this vulnerability.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-19326 — 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-2019-19326 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