CVE-2019-9515
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 · uneditedSome HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both.
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 confidenceHTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood DoS attack where an attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames. Since RFC 7540 requires peers to acknowledge each SETTINGS frame individually, an empty SETTINGS frame functions like a ping. The vulnerability allows attackers to exhaust victim CPU or memory by sending many SETTINGS frames faster than they can be processed.
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>= 6.0.0, <= 6.2.3>= 7.0.0, <= 7.1.6>= 8.0.0, <= 8.0.3= 16.04= 18.04= 19.04= 9.0= 10.0= 29= 30= 1.0= 7.2.0= 7.3.0= 4.1= 1.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 HTTP/2-enabled servicesReview your server configuration for any service exposing HTTP/2 endpoints (look for 'h2' or 'HTTP/2' in SSL/TLS configurations, proxy configs, or application server settings). Check listening services with: netstat -tlnp | grep -E ':(443|80|8080)\b' or ss -tlnpAffected if HTTP/2 is enabled and exposed on any listening service
-
Determine Apache Traffic Server versionIf Apache Traffic Server is in use, run: traffic_server -version or ats-version. On systems with package managers: dpkg -l trafficserver or rpm -qa trafficserverAffected if Installed version falls within 6.0.0-6.2.3, 7.0.0-7.1.6, or 8.0.0-8.0.3
-
Check base OS HTTP/2 librariesFor Ubuntu/Debian: dpkg -l | grep -E 'libnghttp2|apache2|nginx'. For Fedora: rpm -qa | grep -E 'nghttp2|httpd|nginx'. Identify the HTTP/2 stack version in use by the OS packagesAffected if Running Ubuntu 16.04, 18.04, 19.04; Debian 9.0 or 10.0; or Fedora 29 or 30 with HTTP/2-enabled services
-
Verify Red Hat product versionsFor JBoss Core Services: rpm -qa jboss-core-services. For JBoss EAP: grep -r 'jboss-eap' /opt or check /opt/jboss-*/bin/standalone.sh --version. For OpenShift: oc get clusterversion versionAffected if JBoss Core Services 1.0, JBoss EAP 7.2.0 or 7.3.0, OpenShift Container Platform 4.1, or OpenShift Service Mesh 1.0 is deployed with HTTP/2 exposed
Your environment is affected if any HTTP/2-enabled service is running on a product version matching the affected ranges listed above, since the vulnerability exists in the HTTP/2 implementation itself when processing SETTINGS frames.
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 affected HTTP/2 implementations to enforce rate limits or reject excessive SETTINGS frames, and configure appropriate resource limits and timeouts for SETTINGS frame handling.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
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 locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-9515 — 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- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- seclists.org
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- access.redhat.com
- github.com
- kb.cert.org
- kc.mcafee.com
- seclists.org
- seclists.org
- seclists.org
- security.netapp.com
- support.f5.com
- usn.ubuntu.com
- www.debian.org
- www.debian.org
- www.synology.com
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.apache.org
- lists.fedoraproject.org
- lists.fedoraproject.org
- support.f5.com
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-9515 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