CVE-2019-4530
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 Maximo Asset Management 7.6, 7.6.1, and 7.6.1.1 could allow an authenticated user to delete a record that they should not normally be able to. IBM X-Force ID: 165586.
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 confidenceIBM Maximo Asset Management versions 7.6 through 7.6.1.1 contains an improper authorization vulnerability where an authenticated user can delete records they should not have permission to delete. This is a broken access control issue allowing privilege escalation for delete operations.
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= 7.6.0.0= 7.6.1= 7.6.1.1CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 installed Maximo versionAccess the Maximo System Information page or check the version.properties file in the installation directory to determine the exact version number of IBM Maximo Asset ManagementAffected if The installed version is 7.6.0.0, 7.6.1, or 7.6.1.1
-
Verify delete permission enforcementCreate a test scenario where a user with limited permissions attempts to delete a record they should not have access to, or review the security group and permission configuration in Maximo to confirm delete operations are properly restricted by access controlAffected if Users can delete records outside their authorized scope despite proper permission settings being configured
-
Audit user security group permissionsReview the security groups, roles, and object-level permissions configured in Maximo to determine which users have delete access to sensitive record typesAffected if Users with limited roles can perform delete operations on records they should not have permission to modify
You are affected if running IBM Maximo Asset Management version 7.6.0.0, 7.6.1, or 7.6.1.1 and users can delete records beyond their authorized permissions.
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 the IBM fix (contact IBM support for PTF/patch availability). In the interim, review and restrict user role permissions to minimize the blast radius of this authorization bypass.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-4530 — 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-2019-4530 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