LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2019-13057: An issue was discovered in the server in OpenLDAP before 2.4.48.

An issue was discovered in the server in OpenLDAP before 2.4.48. When the server administrator delegates rootDN (database admin) privileges for certain databases but wants to maintain isolation (e.g., for multi-tenant deployments), slapd does not properly stop a rootDN from requesting authorization as an identity from another database during a SASL bind or with a proxyAuthz (RFC 4370) control. (It is not a common configuration to deploy a system where the server administrator and a DB administrator enjoy different levels of trust.)

UnknownCVSS not scoredNot KEV-listedUpdated
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysis

Security readout for executives and security teams

CVE-2019-13057 is an OpenLDAP server authorization isolation flaw. In uncommon deployments where central administrators delegate database-level rootDN privileges, a delegated database administrator could request authorization as an identity from another database. The main business concern is cross-tenant or cross-database privilege boundary failure, not broad unauthenticated compromise. Exposure is most likely where OpenLDAP slapd before 2.4.48 is used with multiple databases and delegated rootDN administrators. Standard single-administrator deployments appear less exposed based on the CVE description, which calls this an uncommon trust split. Prioritize remediation for LDAP services that separate tenants, business units, or delegated administrators by database. For ordinary single-trust-domain LDAP deployments, urgency is lower, but patched vendor packages should still be applied through normal security maintenance. Mitigation focus: Upgrade OpenLDAP slapd to 2.4.48 or a vendor-patched package.; Apply relevant Ubuntu, Debian, SUSE, Apple, Oracle, NetApp, or McAfee guidance where applicable.; Review whether delegated rootDN privileges are still operationally necessary..

Prepared

Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

description · low confidence lookup

Database behavior lookup

The CVE wording references database injection or access, so collection and exfiltration review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2019-13057 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profileCVE Program record
Severity
Unknown
CVSS
Not scored
Known Exploited
No
Published
Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

0CVSS vectors
0Timeline events
0ADP providers
12Source links

CVSS and timeline data

No CVSS vectors or timeline events were available in the normalized CVE source material.

Source materials

Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
n/an/an/aListed
Weakness

CWE details

No CWE listed

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.