CVE-2019-5909
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 · uneditedLicense Manager Service of YOKOGAWA products (CENTUM VP (R5.01.00 - R6.06.00), CENTUM VP Entry Class (R5.01.00 - R6.06.00), ProSafe-RS (R3.01.00 - R4.04.00), PRM (R4.01.00 - R4.02.00), B/M9000 VP(R7.01.01 - R8.02.03)) allows remote attackers to bypass access restriction to send malicious files to the PC where License Manager Service runs 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 · high confidenceThe License Manager Service in multiple YOKOGAWA industrial control products (CENTUM VP, ProSafe-RS, PRM, B/M9000 VP) contains an access control bypass vulnerability allowing remote unauthenticated attackers to send malicious files to the system. The attack vector is not specified in the advisory, but the CVSS vector suggests network-level exploitation without authentication is possible.
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>= r7.01.01, <= r8.02.03>= r5.01.00, <= r6.06.00>= r4.01.00, <= r4.02.00>= r3.01.00, <= r4.04.00CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 the installed Yokogawa productDetermine which Yokogawa industrial software product is deployed: CENTUM VP, ProSafe-RS, PRM, or B/M9000 VP. Check installed programs, system documentation, or the product's about/version information.Affected if The product is one of CENTUM VP, ProSafe-RS, PRM, or B/M9000 VP and the version falls within the affected ranges.
-
Verify the product version against affected rangesLocate the product version information (typically in the software's main window, system information, or license manager interface). Compare the installed version to the affected ranges: B/m 9000 Vp r7.01.01 to r8.02.03, Centum Vp r5.01.00 to r6.06.00, Prm r4.01.00 to r4.02.00, Prosafe Rs r3.01.00 to r4.04.00.Affected if The installed version is greater than or equal to the lower bound AND less than or equal to the upper bound of any affected range.
-
Confirm License Manager Service is runningCheck if the License Manager Service (LMS or similar) is installed and active on the system. This may be visible in Windows Services, the product's service manager, or the license management console.Affected if The License Manager Service is present and running on the affected product version.
-
Assess network exposure of the License Manager ServiceDetermine if the License Manager Service is listening on network ports and accessible from network segments. Review firewall rules, network configuration, and any port scans of the system.Affected if The License Manager Service is network-accessible without authentication from untrusted network segments.
Your environment is affected if you have any of the four listed Yokogawa products running a version within the specified ranges AND the License Manager Service is accessible on the network.
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.
dbcve · scopedIsolate License Manager Service systems on dedicated network segments with strict firewall rules, apply vendor-released patches for affected versions, and monitor for unauthorized file transfers or service anomalies.
Product-specific: CENTUM VP/R6.07.00+, ProSafe-RS/R4.05.00+, PRM/R4.03.00+, B/M9000 VP/R8.03.00+
- 1. Identify the specific Yokogawa product (CENTUM VP, CENTUM VP Entry Class, ProSafe-RS, PRM, or B/M9000 VP) running in your environment.
- 2. Check the current installed version using the product's system information or license manager.
- 3. For CENTUM VP: Upgrade to version R6.07.00 or later.
- 4. For CENTUM VP Entry Class: Upgrade to version R6.07.00 or later.
- 5. For ProSafe-RS: Upgrade to version R4.05.00 or later.
- 6. For PRM: Upgrade to version R4.03.00 or later.
- 7. For B/M9000 VP: Upgrade to version R8.03.00 or later.
- 8. After upgrade, verify the License Manager Service is running correctly.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $12,352.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-5909 — 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-2019-5909 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