Firepower Services Software For AsaApplication · Cisco
CVE-2019-1980
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 in the protocol detection component of Cisco Firepower Threat Defense Software, Cisco FirePOWER Services Software for ASA, and Cisco Firepower Management Center Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass filtering protections. The vulnerability is due to improper detection of the initial use of a protocol on a nonstandard port. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending traffic on a nonstandard port for the protocol in use through an affected device. An exploit could allow the attacker to bypass filtering and deliver malicious requests to protected systems that would otherwise be blocked. Once the initial protocol flow on the nonstandard port is detected, future flows on the nonstandard port will be successfully detected and handled as configured by the applied policy.
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 protocol detection bypass vulnerability exists in Cisco Firepower products where the initial detection of protocols (HTTP, SMTP, etc.) on nonstandard ports fails, allowing malicious traffic to bypass filtering policies. Once the protocol is detected on the nonstandard port in subsequent flows, the system handles it correctly.
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
Firepower Services Software For AsaApplication
all versions
Secure Firewall Management CenterApplication
>= 2.9.12, <= 2.9.12.15>= 2.9.13, <= 2.9.13.6>= 2.9.14.0, <= 2.9.14.5= 2.9.15= 2.9.16
Secure Firewall Threat DefenseApplication
all versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the Cisco Firepower product in useAccess the Firepower management interface or run 'show version' on the device CLI to identify whether the system is running Cisco Firepower Services for ASA, Firepower Threat Defense, or Secure Firewall Management Center.Affected if The product is any of these three: Cisco Firepower Services Software for ASA, Cisco Firepower Threat Defense, or Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center within the affected version ranges.
-
Check the Secure Firewall Management Center versionIf using Secure Firewall Management Center, access the web UI (or use 'sfcli' CLI) and navigate to Help > About to view the exact version number. Compare against: 2.9.12 through 2.9.12.15, 2.9.13 through 2.9.13.6, 2.9.14.0 through 2.9.14.5, 2.9.15, or 2.9.16.Affected if The Management Center version matches any of the listed vulnerable versions.
-
Verify if nonstandard ports are used for protocol detectionReview the Firepower service policies and access control rules. Check whether HTTP, SMTP, or other protocols are configured or expected to run on nonstandard ports (ports other than their defaults: HTTP=80, SMTP=25, etc.). This can be done via the management console under Policies > Access Control or by reviewing the running configuration.Affected if Any protocol detection is configured or expected on ports other than the standard well-known ports for that protocol.
-
Inspect protocol detection engine behavior on nonstandard portsGenerate test traffic using a protocol (e.g., HTTP) on a nonstandard port (e.g., 8080, 8888). Examine the Firepower intrusion events or connection logs to see if the protocol is correctly identified on the first connection attempt versus subsequent flows.Affected if The protocol is NOT correctly identified on the initial flow but IS identified on subsequent flows for the same session.
-
Review filtering policy coverage for nonstandard port trafficExamine the access control rules and filtering policies to determine if explicit rules exist for protocols on nonstandard ports. Check under Policies > Access Control in the management center for any rules that explicitly define protocol handling for nonstandard ports.Affected if No explicit filtering rules exist for protocols on nonstandard ports, meaning the system relies solely on automatic protocol detection.
You are affected if you run any of the vulnerable Cisco Firepower products and have traffic using protocols on nonstandard ports without explicit filtering rules, since the initial protocol detection will fail and bypass your policies.
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 dataApply Cisco-provided patches for affected Firepower products. As an interim measure, create explicit filtering rules for known protocols on nonstandard ports until the patch can be deployed.
Fix this in Firepower Services Software For Asa
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1980 — 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-2019-1980 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