CVE-2021-43989
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 · uneditedmySCADA myPRO Versions 8.20.0 and prior stores passwords using MD5, which may allow an attacker to crack the previously retrieved password hashes.
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 confidencemySCADA myPRO versions 8.20.0 and prior use the MD5 hashing algorithm to store user passwords. MD5 is cryptographically weak and vulnerable to collision attacks and brute-force cracking. If an attacker obtains the password hashes (through database compromise, SQL injection, or other means), they can efficiently crack the passwords offline using GPU-accelerated tools.
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<= 8.20.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Identify mySCADA myPRO versionAccess the myPRO web interface and navigate to the About or System Information page, or check the installation directory for version metadata files. Alternatively, examine the response headers or login page source for version indicators.Affected if The detected version is 8.20.0 or any earlier version (e.g., 8.19.0, 8.18.0, etc.).
-
Examine stored password hash formatAccess the user database or user configuration files where password hashes are stored. If you have database access, query the user table and inspect the password field. Look for 32-character hexadecimal strings, which is characteristic of MD5 output.Affected if Password hashes appear as 32-character hex strings typical of MD5, or if database schema shows the password column uses an MD5-related storage mechanism.
-
Check configuration for hashing settingsInspect the myPRO configuration files (typically found in the installation directory under conf or config folders) for any password-related settings. Look for entries that explicitly reference MD5 or legacy hashing algorithms.Affected if Configuration files contain explicit references to MD5 for password hashing, or use of a 'legacy' or 'md5' hashing mode.
You are affected if your installed mySCADA myPRO version is 8.20.0 or earlier, and the system stores passwords using MD5 hashing (evidenced by 32-character hex hash format or MD5 configuration settings).
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 dataUpgrade mySCADA myPRO to a version newer than 8.20.0 that implements modern password hashing (e.g., bcrypt, scrypt, or Argon2). Additionally, force password resets for all users as a precautionary measure since the original hashes may have been compromised.
- 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-2021-43989 — 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-2021-43989 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