RaquestApplication · Halvotec

CVE-2019-19614

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-03-09
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
An issue was discovered in Halvotec RAQuest 10.23.10801.0. The login page is vulnerable to wildcard injection, allowing an attacker to enumerate the list of users sharing an identical password. Fixed in Release 10.24.11206.1.

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 confidence

The Halvotec RAQuest login page is vulnerable to wildcard injection, where special characters like * or ? are interpreted as SQL or LDAP wildcards rather than literal characters. An attacker can use wildcard patterns (e.g., 'password*' or '*password') to enumerate which users share identical passwords, enabling credential stuffing and account takeover.

MitigationUpgrade to version 10.24.11206.1 or later. As a temporary workaround, implement input validation to escape or reject wildcard characters in the login form.

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
RaquestApplication
Affected:= 10.23.10801.0

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
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the installed Halvotec RAQuest version
    Check the application version through the About dialog, installation directory metadata, or product documentation. Common paths include the program's properties or a version file in the installation folder.
    Affected if The installed version is 10.23.10801.0 exactly, which matches the vulnerable version listed in the CVE.
  2. Confirm the login page is accessible
    Navigate to the RAQuest login URL endpoint (typically /login or the root application URL) and verify the page loads successfully.
    Affected if The login page is exposed and accepts user credentials.
  3. Test wildcard character acceptance in the username field
    Submit a login request with a username containing an asterisk (*) or question mark (?) character (e.g., username: admin* or *admin) and observe the application's response.
    Affected if The application accepts wildcard characters without sanitization or rejection, treating them as literal characters in the query.
  4. Verify if wildcard patterns trigger different behavior
    Submit two login attempts with different wildcard patterns against the same username base (e.g., 'user*' and 'user?') and compare the responses or error messages.
    Affected if The application treats wildcard characters as special pattern operators rather than literal characters, enabling user enumeration.
  5. Check for user enumeration via wildcard injection
    Attempt login with the same password for multiple usernames containing wildcards (e.g., 'user1*' and 'user2*') and observe if timing differences or error message variations reveal which users share identical passwords.
    Affected if An attacker can determine which users share identical passwords by observing differences in login responses when using wildcard patterns.

You are affected if your installed version is Halvotec RAQuest 10.23.10801.0 and the login page processes wildcard characters as special pattern operators rather than literal characters, allowing user password enumeration.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to version 10.24.11206.1 or later. As a temporary workaround, implement input validation to escape or reject wildcard characters in the login form.

Fix this in Raquest Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing5.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
17.0 hours of engineering $2,970
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,752.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-19614 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-19614 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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