dbcve.org
Hyperflex Hx220c M5 FirmwareOperating system · Cisco

CVE-2019-1975

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2019-09-18
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 3.5.2f or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
A vulnerability in the web-based interface of Cisco HyperFlex Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to execute a cross-frame scripting (XFS) attack on an affected device. This vulnerability is due to insufficient HTML iframe protection. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by directing a user to an attacker-controlled web page that contains a malicious HTML iframe. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to conduct clickjacking or other clientside browser attacks.

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

Cross-frame scripting (XFS) vulnerability in Cisco HyperFlex web interface due to missing iframe protection. An attacker can embed the affected application in a malicious iframe on an attacker-controlled page to conduct clickjacking attacks, tricking users into unintended actions.

MitigationImplement X-Frame-Options: DENY or SAMEORIGIN header, and/or Content-Security-Policy with frame-ancestors directive to prevent the application from being embedded in iframes. Additionally, deploy frame-busting JavaScript as defense-in-depth.

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
Hyperflex Hx220c M5 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:<= 3.5.2f= 4.0\(1a\)
Hyperflex Hx240c M5 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:<= 3.5.2f= 4.0\(1a\)
Hyperflex Hx220c Af M5 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:<= 3.5.2f= 4.0\(1a\)
Hyperflex Hx240c Af M5 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:<= 3.5.2f= 4.0\(1a\)
Hyperflex Hx220c Edge M5 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:<= 3.5.2f= 4.0\(1a\)

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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 Cisco HyperFlex web interface endpoint
    Locate the URL for your HyperFlex cluster web interface. This is typically accessible via HTTPS on the management IP of the HX cluster controller.
    Affected if You have a Cisco HyperFlex Hx220c M5 or Hx240c M5 (or variants) with a web-based management interface.
  2. Check for X-Frame-Options header
    Send an HTTP GET request to the HyperFlex web interface and inspect the response headers. Look for the X-Frame-Options header. Use a tool like curl: curl -I https://<hx-management-ip>/
    Affected if The response does NOT include X-Frame-Options: DENY or X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN header.
  3. Check for Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directive
    Inspect the Content-Security-Policy header in the HTTP response. Look for the frame-ancestors directive. Example: curl -I https://<hx-management-ip>/ | grep -i content-security-policy
    Affected if The Content-Security-Policy header is missing OR does NOT contain the frame-ancestors directive.
  4. Verify firmware version is within affected range
    Access the HyperFlex cluster via SSH or web UI and identify the firmware version. Navigate to the cluster configuration or about section to confirm the exact version number.
    Affected if The firmware version is 3.5.2f or lower, OR exactly 4.0(1a).

A user is affected if their HyperFlex web interface lacks X-Frame-Options and Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors headers, AND the firmware version matches <=3.5.2f or =4.0(1a).

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
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 3.5.2f
Interim mitigation

Implement X-Frame-Options: DENY or SAMEORIGIN header, and/or Content-Security-Policy with frame-ancestors directive to prevent the application from being embedded in iframes. Additionally, deploy frame-busting JavaScript as defense-in-depth.

Fix this in Hyperflex Hx220c M5 Firmware Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing1.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,090
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1975 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2019-1975 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