Sv8100 FirmwareOperating system · Nec

CVE-2019-20027

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-07-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Aspire-derived NEC PBXes, including the SV8100, SV9100, SL1100 and SL2100 with software releases 7.0 or higher contain the possibility if incorrectly configured to allow a blank username and password combination to be entered as a valid, successfully authenticating account.

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 confidence

NEC Aspire-derived PBX systems (SV8100, SV9100, SL1100, SL2100) running software 7.0+ have a critical authentication bypass vulnerability where incorrect configuration allows a blank username and password to be accepted as valid credentials, enabling unauthenticated attackers to gain administrative access to the telecommunications system.

MitigationReview and reconfigure the PBX authentication settings to explicitly require non-empty username and password credentials; disable any configuration allowing blank or default credentials; verify no unauthorized accounts exist with blank credentials.

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
Sv8100 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:>= 7.0
Sv9100 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:>= 7.0
Sl1100 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:>= 7.0
Sl2100 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:>= 7.0

CVSS 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
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify PBX model and firmware version
    Access the system administration interface or use the vendor-provided management tool to retrieve the device model and current firmware version. Common access points include the web-based management console or the system programming mode.
    Affected if The device model is SV8100, SV9100, SL1100, and SL2100 AND the firmware version is 7.0 or higher
  2. Locate authentication configuration settings
    Navigate to the system security or user management section within the PBX administration interface. Look for settings related to login authentication, password policy, or user account configuration.
    Affected if Authentication settings allow empty (blank) username or password fields, or a default/admin account is configured with no password
  3. Review configured user accounts
    Examine the list of all user accounts configured on the PBX system, particularly administrative accounts. Check each account for blank username or blank password fields.
    Affected if Any account exists with a blank username, blank password, or both
  4. Test credential acceptance with blank fields
    Attempt to authenticate to the PBX management interface using an empty username field and empty password field. Observe whether the system accepts these blank credentials as valid.
    Affected if The system grants access or accepts the login attempt when both username and password fields are left empty

A user is affected if their NEC PBX model is an SV8100, SV9100, SL1100, or SL2100 running firmware version 7.0 or higher AND the authentication configuration permits blank username or password credentials.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Review and reconfigure the PBX authentication settings to explicitly require non-empty username and password credentials; disable any configuration allowing blank or default credentials; verify no unauthorized accounts exist with blank credentials.

Fix this in Sv8100 Firmware Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,150
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,440.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-20027 — 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

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-20027 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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