CVE-2019-3751
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 · uneditedDell EMC Enterprise Copy Data Management (eCDM) versions 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 2.1, and 3.0 contain a certificate validation vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker may potentially exploit this vulnerability to carry out a man-in-the-middle attack by supplying a crafted certificate and intercepting the victim's traffic to view or modify a victim’s data in transit.
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 confidenceDell EMC eCDM versions 1.0-3.0 contain a certificate validation vulnerability where the application fails to properly validate SSL/TLS certificates. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by supplying a crafted (e.g., self-signed or malicious) certificate to perform a man-in-the-middle attack, allowing interception and modification of encrypted traffic between the client and server.
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= 1.0= 1.1= 2.0= 2.1= 3.0CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 eCDM installation and versionLocate the Dell EMC eCDM installation directory or check system inventory for the installed version (e.g., via 'dpkg -l', 'rpm -qi', or product-specific inventory tools)Affected if The installed version is 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 2.1, or 3.0
-
Review SSL/TLS configuration for certificate validationInspect eCDM configuration files or registry settings related to SSL/TLS connections for any option that disables or bypasses certificate chain validationAffected if Certificate validation is disabled, set to optional, or explicitly allows invalid certificates
-
Check for acceptance of self-signed certificatesExamine eCDM connection settings or client configuration to determine whether self-signed or untrusted certificates are permitted without user warningAffected if The application is configured to accept self-signed or untrusted CA certificates without rejection
-
Inspect certificate trust store configurationReview the trust store or CA certificate bundle that eCDM uses to validate server certificates, noting which CAs are trustedAffected if The trust store contains non-standard CAs, includes test certificates, or lacks proper CA certificate chain validation
You are affected if eCDM version 1.0 through 3.0 is installed and the SSL/TLS configuration permits invalid, self-signed, or unverified certificates without rejection.
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 vendor-supplied patches for eCDM versions 1.0-3.0 and ensure proper certificate chain validation is implemented, rejecting self-signed or invalid certificates. Verify that the application trusts only certificates from trusted CAs.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-3751 — 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-2019-3751 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