Oncommand Workflow AutomationApplication · Netapp

CVE-2019-5503

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2019-09-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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 Workflow Automation versions prior to 5.0 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 Workflow Automation versions prior to 5.0 shipped with missing HTTP Security headers (such as HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, or CSP), which could allow attackers to obtain sensitive information through vectors like clickjacking, MIME-type sniffing, or man-in-the-middle attacks.

MitigationConfigure the web server or load balancer to include appropriate HTTP security headers (HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and Content-Security-Policy) to prevent 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
Oncommand Workflow AutomationApplication
Affected:= 5.0

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
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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. Identify OnCommand Workflow Automation version
    Log into the OnCommand Workflow Automation admin interface and navigate to the 'About' or 'System Information' page to view the installed version. Alternatively, check the version displayed on the login page footer or use the command line interface if available.
    Affected if The installed version is prior to 5.0 (e.g., 4.x, 3.x series)
  2. Verify HTTP response headers from the web interface
    Send an HTTP GET request to the OnCommand Workflow Automation web server (e.g., using curl -I https://<hostname>) and inspect the response headers returned.
    Affected if The response lacks any of these headers: Strict-Transport-Security, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, or Content-Security-Policy
  3. Check for HSTS header specifically
    Examine the HTTP response headers for the 'Strict-Transport-Security' header. This header should have a max-age directive indicating the duration (e.g., max-age=31536000).
    Affected if The Strict-Transport-Security header is missing from HTTPS responses
  4. Check for X-Frame-Options header
    Examine the HTTP response headers for the 'X-Frame-Options' header, which should be set to DENY or SAMEORIGIN to prevent clickjacking.
    Affected if The X-Frame-Options header is missing from responses
  5. Check for X-Content-Type-Options header
    Examine the HTTP response headers for the 'X-Content-Type-Options' header, which should be set to 'nosniff' to prevent MIME-type sniffing.
    Affected if The X-Content-Type-Options header is missing from responses

You are affected if OnCommand Workflow Automation is installed at a version prior to 5.0 AND any of the security headers (HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, CSP) are missing from the web interface HTTP responses.

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
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Configure the web server or load balancer to include appropriate HTTP security headers (HSTS, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, X-XSS-Protection, and Content-Security-Policy) to prevent information disclosure.

Fix this in Oncommand Workflow Automation Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing1.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,090
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-5503 — 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-2019-5503 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