CVE-2021-34572
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 · uneditedEnbra EWM 1.7.29 does not check for or detect replay attacks sent by wireless M-Bus Security mode 5 devices. Instead timestamps of the sensor are replaced by the time of the readout even if the data is a replay of earlier data.
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 confidenceEnbra EWM 1.7.29 fails to validate the freshness of data received from wireless M-Bus Security mode 5 devices, allowing replay attacks. The system accepts any incoming data and replaces the original sensor timestamp with the current readout time, meaning previously captured valid transmissions can be resubmitted without detection.
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= 1.7.29CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Identify Enbra EWM installed versionQuery the software version through the EWM administrative interface or system information panel, or use the product's built-in version check command if availableAffected if The installed version is exactly 1.7.29
-
Confirm wireless M-Bus device usageReview EWM configuration to determine if wireless M-Bus devices are connected and actively transmitting data to the systemAffected if Wireless M-Bus devices are configured and sending data to the EWM installation
-
Verify Security mode 5 configurationExamine the M-Bus device settings or security configuration within the EWM interface to identify which security mode is enabled for wireless transmissionsAffected if M-Bus devices are using Security mode 5 for data transmission
All three conditions must be true to be affected: Enbra EWM version 1.7.29 is installed, wireless M-Bus devices are actively used, and Security mode 5 is enabled for those transmissions.
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 freshness checks (e.g., sequence counters, nonces, or timestamp validation with acceptable time windows) to ensure each M-Bus transmission is unique and recent, rejecting any data that fails freshness validation.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-34572 — 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-2021-34572 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