dbcve.org
SearchbloxApplication

CVE-2020-10129

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-09-06
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 9.2.1 or later.
See remediation →
94/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable 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
SearchBlox before Version 9.2.1 is vulnerable to Privileged Escalation-Lower user is able to access Admin functionality.

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

SearchBlox before version 9.2.1 contains a broken access control vulnerability that allows non-privileged users to perform administrative actions. The application fails to properly enforce authorization checks, permitting lower-privilege users to access admin functionality through direct object references or missing role validations.

MitigationUpgrade SearchBlox to version 9.2.1 or later. Additionally, conduct a comprehensive access control review to ensure all administrative functions properly validate user privileges and role-based access controls are enforced.

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
SearchbloxApplication
Affected:< 9.2.1

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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. Determine installed SearchBlox version
    Access the SearchBlox admin interface and locate the version information typically displayed on the login page, in the admin dashboard footer, or in the 'About' section. Alternatively, check any version file within the SearchBlox installation directory or review startup logs for the version string.
    Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 9.2.1 (e.g., 9.2.0, 9.1.x, earlier releases).
  2. Identify non-privileged user accounts
    Log into SearchBlox with a standard user account that does not have administrative privileges. Confirm the account role through the user management section if available.
    Affected if A non-admin user account exists in the system.
  3. Test direct access to administrative endpoints
    Using a non-privileged user session, attempt to access common SearchBlox admin URLs such as /admin, /admin/users, /admin/config, /admin/search, or similar administrative paths by typing them directly in the browser or sending authenticated HTTP requests.
    Affected if The non-admin user can load admin pages, view administrative interfaces, or execute admin functions without being denied access.
  4. Verify authorization on administrative actions
    While logged in as a non-admin user, attempt to perform actions that should be restricted to administrators, such as modifying search configurations, managing user accounts, changing system settings, or accessing data sources.
    Affected if The non-privileged user can successfully complete administrative actions or receives a success response rather than an authorization error.

You are affected if your installed SearchBlox version is below 9.2.1 AND non-privileged users can access or execute administrative functions without proper authorization checks.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 9.2.1 or later
Fixed in 9.2.1
Interim mitigation

Upgrade SearchBlox to version 9.2.1 or later. Additionally, conduct a comprehensive access control review to ensure all administrative functions properly validate user privileges and role-based access controls are enforced.

Recommended fix High confidence

SearchBlox 9.2.1 or later

  1. 1. Identify current SearchBlox version by checking the SearchBlox administration interface or installation files
  2. 2. Backup all SearchBlox data, configuration files, and database
  3. 3. Download SearchBlox version 9.2.1 or later from the official SearchBlox distribution channel (developer.searchblox.com)
  4. 4. Stop the SearchBlox service
  5. 5. Install SearchBlox version 9.2.1 or later following the official upgrade documentation
  6. 6. Start the SearchBlox service
  7. 7. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version in the admin interface
  8. 8. Log in with both regular user and admin accounts to confirm privilege separation is working correctly - regular users should no longer be able to access admin functionality

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Searchblox Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
17.0 hours of engineering $3,000
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-10129 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2020-10129 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