CVE-2020-10041
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 · uneditedA vulnerability has been identified in SICAM MMU (All versions < V2.05), SICAM SGU (All versions), SICAM T (All versions < V2.18). A stored Cross-Site-Scripting (XSS) vulnerability is present in different locations of the web application. An attacker might be able to take over a session of a legitimate user.
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 confidenceA stored Cross-Site-Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the web interfaces of SICAM MMU (versions < V2.05), SICAM SGU (all versions), and SICAM T (versions < V2.18). Malicious scripts can be persistently injected into various web application locations and executed in browsers of legitimate users, potentially allowing session hijacking.
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< 2.05all versions< 2.18CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 the deployed SICAM productAccess the device management interface or system information page to determine which SICAM product is installed: MMU, SGU, or TAffected if The product is SICAM MMU, SICAM SGU, or SICAM T (any of the three affected product lines)
-
Check the firmware versionLocate the firmware version information in the product's web interface, system settings, or device management console. Compare your installed version against the affected ranges: SICAM MMU < V2.05, SICAM SGU (all versions), SICAM T < V2.18Affected if The installed version falls within: MMU versions below 2.05, any SGU version, or T versions below 2.18
-
Verify if the web interface is enabledCheck the product configuration or network settings to determine whether the web-based management interface is accessible and activeAffected if The web interface is enabled and accessible (the XSS only affects web interfaces)
-
Review web application logs for injected scriptsExamine the web server logs or application logs for any unusual script tags, JavaScript code, or HTML elements that may have been injected into user-supplied fields such as device names, descriptions, or configuration parametersAffected if Suspicious script content appears in logs or in stored configuration fields
You are affected if you have SICAM MMU firmware below V2.05, any SICAM SGU version, or SICAM T firmware below V2.18, and the web interface is enabled.
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 data2.052.18
Upgrade to SICAM MMU V2.05 or later, SICAM T V2.18 or later (SGU requires contacting vendor for patch availability). Alternatively, implement robust input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied data fields in the web application.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-10041 — 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-2020-10041 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