CVE-2019-19664
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 CSRF vulnerability exists in the Web Settings of Web File Manager in Rumpus FTP 8.2.9.1. Exploitation of this vulnerability can result in manipulation of Server Web settings at RAPR/WebSettingsGeneralSet.html.
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 CSRF vulnerability in Rumpus FTP 8.2.9.1 allows attackers to craft malicious requests that trick authenticated administrators into unknowingly modifying Server Web settings via the WebSettingsGeneralSet.html endpoint. The application lacks proper anti-CSRF tokens or origin validation, enabling unauthorized configuration changes.
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= 8.2.9.1CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/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.
-
Identify installed Rumpus FTP versionCheck the application's About or Version information panel in the web interface, or look in the application binary/version file. Compare against the affected version 8.2.9.1.Affected if The installed version is exactly 8.2.9.1
-
Verify web management interface is enabledConfirm that the Rumpus web server is running and accessible. Attempt to reach the login page (typically at / or /login.html).Affected if The web interface is accessible and the administrator is logged in, allowing the CSRF target endpoint to be reachable
-
Confirm the vulnerable endpoint existsInspect whether WebSettingsGeneralSet.html exists in the web root directory or is accessible via the web interface path.Affected if The WebSettingsGeneralSet.html endpoint is present and accessible without anti-CSRF token validation
-
Check authentication state requirementsDetermine if the CSRF attack requires an authenticated administrator session. Verify if the web settings can be accessed by a logged-in administrator.Affected if An authenticated administrator session is active, as the attack tricks an authenticated user into submitting the malicious request
You are affected if running Maxum Rumpus FTP version 8.2.9.1 with the web management interface enabled and an administrator logged in when the WebSettingsGeneralSet.html endpoint is accessible without CSRF protection.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) for all state-changing operations in the Web Settings interface, and configure SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-origin request submission.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-19664 — 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-2019-19664 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