Enterprise LinuxOperating system · Redhat
CVE-2019-6465
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 · uneditedControls for zone transfers may not be properly applied to Dynamically Loadable Zones (DLZs) if the zones are writable Versions affected: BIND 9.9.0 -> 9.10.8-P1, 9.11.0 -> 9.11.5-P2, 9.12.0 -> 9.12.3-P2, and versions 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.5-S3 of BIND 9 Supported Preview Edition. Versions 9.13.0 -> 9.13.6 of the 9.13 development branch are also affected. Versions prior to BIND 9.9.0 have not been evaluated for vulnerability to CVE-2019-6465.
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 confidenceBIND 9 does not properly enforce zone transfer ACLs on Dynamically Loadable Zones (DLZs) when those zones are writable. This could allow unauthorized zone transfers to occur, potentially exposing DNS zone data to unauthorized actors.
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
Enterprise LinuxOperating system
= 8.0>= 9.9.0, <= 9.10.7>= 9.11.0, <= 9.11.4>= 9.12.0, <= 9.12.2>= 9.13.0, <= 9.13.6= 9.9.3= 9.10.8= 9.11.5= 9.12.3CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed BIND versionRun `named -v` or `rpm -q bind` to obtain the version numberAffected if Version falls within >= 9.9.0 to <= 9.10.7, >= 9.11.0 to <= 9.11.4, >= 9.12.0 to <= 9.12.2, >= 9.13.0 to <= 9.13.6, or equals 9.9.3, 9.10.8, 9.11.5, or 9.12.3
-
Identify if DLZ is configuredInspect named.conf for 'dlz' or 'dynamically loadable zone' statements. Search for lines containing 'dlz' in the configuration filesAffected if DLZ modules are defined in the BIND configuration
-
Verify if DLZ zones are writableIn the DLZ configuration block, look for 'allow-update' statements or any write permissions. Also check for 'database' directive pointing to a writable backendAffected if DLZ zones have write/update permissions enabled (allow-update present or writable flag set)
-
Check zone transfer ACLs on DLZ zonesIn the DLZ configuration block, look for 'allow-transfer' statements. Also check for any 'allow-query' or 'allow-transfer' at the zone or view levelAffected if allow-transfer ACL is missing, set to 'any', or not explicitly restricting transfers for DLZ zones
User is affected if running a vulnerable BIND 9 version with DLZ zones configured as writable and without explicit allow-transfer ACLs restricting zone transfers.
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 dataUpdate BIND 9 to a patched version (9.11.5-P3, 9.12.3-P3, 9.13.7, or later) or, if patching is not immediately possible, ensure DLZ zones are configured as read-only and verify that appropriate allow-transfer ACLs are explicitly set for all zones.
Fix this in Enterprise Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-6465 — 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-2019-6465 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