Oncommand Unified ManagerApplication · Netapp

CVE-2019-5495

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2019-05-10
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 9.5 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
OnCommand Unified Manager for VMware vSphere, Linux and Windows prior to 9.5 shipped without certain HTTP Security headers configured which could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors.

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 confidence

OnCommand Unified Manager versions prior to 9.5 shipped without certain HTTP Security headers configured. Missing security headers (such as HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, or Content-Security-Policy) can allow attackers to obtain sensitive information through vectors like MIME-type sniffing, clickjacking, or protocol downgrade attacks.

MitigationConfigure appropriate HTTP security headers (HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, CSP) in the web server or application server configuration for OnCommand Unified Manager.

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
Oncommand Unified ManagerApplication
Affected:< 9.5

CVSS 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
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm OnCommand Unified Manager is installed
    Identify if OnCommand Unified Manager is present in your environment. Check for the service process or application installation directory typically found under /opt/netapp or /usr/local on Linux systems, or C:\Program Files\NetApp on Windows.
    Affected if The product is not installed or not accessible - if not present, this CVE does not apply.
  2. Determine the installed version
    Access the OnCommand Unified Manager web interface login page or check the software via command line using 'ucmadmin' or similar management utilities provided with the installation. The version is typically displayed on the login page footer or obtainable via 'ucmadmin -v' or the administration console.
    Affected if Version is 9.5 or later - versions 9.5 and above are NOT affected. Versions prior to 9.5 ARE affected.
  3. Inspect HTTP response headers from the web interface
    Using a browser developer tool (F12 -> Network tab) or a command line tool like curl (run: curl -I https://<your-ocm-server>/ or curl -I http://<your-ocm-server>/), capture the HTTP response headers from the OnCommand Unified Manager login page or any served page.
    Affected if The response headers are missing any of: Strict-Transport-Security (HSTS), X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, or Content-Security-Policy. If all four headers are present with valid values, the environment is NOT affected. If any are missing, the environment IS affected.

You are affected if OnCommand Unified Manager is installed and the version is below 9.5 AND the HTTP responses from its web interface are missing one or more of the four security headers (HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, Content-Security-Policy).

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to 9.5 or later
Fixed in 9.5
Interim mitigation

Configure appropriate HTTP security headers (HSTS, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, CSP) in the web server or application server configuration for OnCommand Unified Manager.

Fix this in Oncommand Unified Manager Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,130
Get the upgrade done

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-5495 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-5495 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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