Openstack MistralApplication · Redhat
CVE-2019-3866
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 · uneditedAn information-exposure vulnerability was discovered where openstack-mistral's undercloud log files containing clear-text information were made world readable. A malicious system user could exploit this flaw to access sensitive user information.
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 confidenceOpenStack Mistral's undercloud log files contain sensitive user information stored in clear text. These log files are created with world-readable permissions (e.g., 644), allowing any local user to read sensitive data including credentials, API tokens, or user-identifiable information through the filesystem.
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
Openstack MistralApplication
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Verify Mistral is installedCheck for mistral service processes running on the system (e.g., ps aux | grep mistral) or look for mistral packages (e.g., rpm -qa | grep mistral on RHEL-based systems)Affected if Mistral is present and running on the system
-
Locate Mistral log filesSearch for log files in directories such as /var/log/mistral/ or /var/log/containers/mistral/ if using containerized deployment, and note all discovered log file pathsAffected if Mistral log files exist on the system
-
Check log file permissionsRun 'ls -la' on the discovered Mistral log files and examine the permission bits (the first column). Compare against expected restrictive permissions like 640 or 600Affected if Any Mistral log file shows permissions of 644 or more permissive (e.g., 644, 655, 666) indicating world-readable access
-
Inspect logs for sensitive dataUse grep or cat to examine the log file contents, searching for patterns such as 'password', 'token', 'secret', 'api_key', or other credential-like strings in plain textAffected if Log files contain visible plain-text credentials, API tokens, or user-identifiable information
The environment is affected if Mistral is installed and produces log files with world-readable permissions (644 or more open) that contain unencrypted sensitive information such as credentials or tokens.
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 dataConfigure log file permissions to restrict access (e.g., chmod 640 or 600) and ensure the logging subsystem creates files with appropriate restrictive permissions. Review log rotation configurations to maintain proper permissions on rotated logs.
Fix this in Openstack Mistral
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-3866 — 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-2019-3866 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