CVE-2019-4396
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 · uneditedIBM Cloud Orchestrator 2.4 through 2.4.0.5 and 2.5 through 2.5.0.9 is vulnerable to HTTP response splitting attacks, caused by improper validation of user-supplied input. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and cause the server to return a split response, once the URL is clicked. This would allow the attacker to perform further attacks, such as Web cache poisoning or cross-site scripting, and possibly obtain sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 162236.
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 confidenceIBM Cloud Orchestrator versions 2.4 through 2.4.0.5 and 2.5 through 2.5.0.9 is vulnerable to HTTP response splitting due to improper validation of user-supplied input. A remote attacker can exploit this by crafting malicious URLs that inject arbitrary HTTP headers into server responses, enabling secondary attacks such as Web cache poisoning, cross-site scripting (XSS), or sensitive information disclosure.
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>= 2.4.0.0, <= 2.4.0.5>= 2.5.0.0, <= 2.5.0.9CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed IBM Cloud Orchestrator versionCheck the product version through the IBM Cloud Orchestrator administration console, installation directory, or by querying the product's version metadata (typically found in /opt/ibm/*/version.txt or through the management interface)Affected if The installed version falls within 2.4.0.0 through 2.4.0.5, or 2.5.0.0 through 2.5.0.9
-
Verify web interface exposureConfirm whether the IBM Cloud Orchestrator web console or REST API endpoints are accessible over HTTP/HTTPS from the networkAffected if The web interface is exposed and reachable by attackers who can submit malicious URLs
-
Check for user input handling in HTTP headersReview web server configuration and application logs for any parameters that are reflected in HTTP response headers without proper sanitizationAffected if User-supplied values from URL parameters, form inputs, or headers are being inserted into HTTP responses without validation or encoding
You are affected if IBM Cloud Orchestrator version is between 2.4.0.0-2.4.0.5 or 2.5.0.0-2.5.0.9 AND the web interface is accessible, allowing attackers to inject arbitrary headers via unsanitized user input.
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 IBM's patched version for IBM Cloud Orchestrator 2.4 and 2.5, or implement input validation and output encoding to sanitize user-supplied values before inserting them into HTTP headers.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-4396 — 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-2019-4396 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