CVE-2019-25241
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 · uneditedFaceSentry Access Control System 6.4.8 contains a critical authentication vulnerability with hard-coded SSH credentials for the wwwuser account. Attackers can leverage the insecure sudoers configuration to escalate privileges and gain root access by executing sudo commands without authentication.
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 · moderate confidenceFaceSentry Access Control System version 6.4.8 contains hard-coded SSH credentials for the wwwuser account, allowing attackers to authenticate via SSH. The insecure sudoers configuration permits execution of sudo commands without authentication, enabling complete root privilege escalation.
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= 5.7.0= 5.7.2= 6.4.8CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 the firmware versionAccess the FaceSentry admin interface or check system information files (such as /etc/version, /proc/version, or the web UI status page) to determine the installed firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is 5.7.0, 5.7.2, or 6.4.8
-
Verify SSH service availabilityCheck if the SSH service is running on the device (e.g., attempt to connect to port 22 or check running processes for sshd)Affected if SSH is enabled and accessible on the FaceSentry device
-
Test wwwuser SSH authenticationAttempt SSH authentication using the wwwuser account with the hard-coded credentials known to exist in the affected firmware versions, or examine /etc/shadow, /etc/passwd, or SSH configuration files for embedded credentialsAffected if SSH login succeeds with the hard-coded wwwuser credentials or credentials are found embedded in system configuration files
-
Examine sudoers configurationInspect the sudoers configuration file (typically /etc/sudoers or files in /etc/sudoers.d/) for the wwwuser account entries, looking for NOPASSWD directives that permit passwordless sudo executionAffected if The sudoers configuration contains NOPASSWD or similar directives allowing wwwuser to execute sudo commands without authentication
A system is affected if it runs FaceSentry firmware version 5.7.0, 5.7.2, or 6.4.8 and allows SSH access as wwwuser without requiring a unique password, or permits passwordless sudo execution from the wwwuser account.
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 dataImmediately change the hard-coded wwwuser SSH credentials to a strong, unique password and revise the sudoers configuration to require authentication for privileged commands. Consider updating to a patched version if available.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-25241 — 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-2019-25241 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