CVE-2019-7270
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 · uneditedLinear eMerge 50P/5000P devices allow Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF).
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 confidenceCross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in Linear eMerge 50P/5000P access control devices allows attackers to trick authenticated users into performing unintended actions on the device's web interface, potentially compromising building security systems.
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<= 4.6.07<= 4.6.07CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 device modelLog into the web interface of the access control device and navigate to the System Information or About page to confirm the device is a Linear eMerge 50P or 5000P.Affected if The device model is not a Linear eMerge 50P or 5000P.
-
Check firmware versionIn the device web interface, locate the firmware version information typically found under Settings, System, or About sections. Compare the displayed version number against 4.6.07.Affected if The installed firmware version is 4.6.07 or lower.
-
Inspect web forms for CSRF protectionUse a browser developer tool to examine the HTML source code of state-changing forms (such as user management, door configuration, or system settings). Check if each form includes a unique anti-CSRF token as a hidden input field.Affected if The forms do not contain anti-CSRF token fields or the tokens are not validated server-side.
-
Verify token validation behaviorSubmit a state-changing request (such as adding a test user or modifying a door schedule) without including the expected token parameter and observe whether the request is rejected.Affected if The request succeeds without a valid token, indicating CSRF protection is not enforced.
You are affected if your device is a Linear eMerge 50P or 5000P running firmware version 4.6.07 or lower, and the web interface forms lack anti-CSRF token validation.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens and validation for all state-changing requests in the web application; verify the device firmware has been updated to a version that includes CSRF protection mechanisms.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-7270 — 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-2019-7270 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