CVE-2019-9534
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 · uneditedThe Cobham EXPLORER 710, firmware version 1.07, does not validate its firmware image. Development scripts left in the firmware can be used to upload a custom firmware image that the device runs. This could allow an unauthenticated, local attacker to upload their own firmware that could be used to intercept or modify traffic, spoof or intercept GPS traffic, exfiltrate private data, hide a backdoor, or cause a denial-of-service.
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 confidenceThe Cobham EXPLORER 710 satellite terminal firmware version 1.07 lacks firmware image validation, allowing unauthenticated local attackers to upload custom firmware due to development scripts left in the production build. This enables complete device compromise including traffic interception, GPS spoofing, data exfiltration, backdoor installation, or denial of service.
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= 1.07CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 device modelAccess the device web interface, CLI, or administrative console and confirm the device is a Cobham EXPLORER 710 satellite terminalAffected if The device model is Cobham EXPLORER 710
-
Check the installed firmware versionNavigate to the device web interface system information page, or use the CLI command 'show version' or 'system info' to retrieve the firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is exactly 1.07
-
Verify firmware update mechanism accessibilityAccess the firmware update section of the device admin interface (typically under Administration > Firmware or Maintenance > Update) without providing credentialsAffected if The firmware upload interface is accessible without authentication
-
Confirm development scripts presenceIf CLI or SSH access is available, check common development script directories (such as /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /tmp) for scripts with development-related names (debug, test, dev) or unusual update scriptsAffected if Development scripts, debug utilities, or unauthenticated update mechanisms are found on the device
The device is affected if it is a Cobham EXPLORER 710 running firmware version 1.07 with an unauthenticated or development script-enabled firmware update interface.
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 cryptographic firmware signature verification and secure boot chain, remove all development scripts from production firmware images, and require authenticated firmware update mechanisms.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation40.0 h
- Testing16.0 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 $20,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-9534 — 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-2019-9534 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