CVE-2020-10276
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 · uneditedThe password for the safety PLC is the default and thus easy to find (in manuals, etc.). This allows a manipulated program to be uploaded to the safety PLC, effectively disabling the emergency stop in case an object is too close to the robot. Navigation and any other components dependent on the laser scanner are not affected (thus it is hard to detect before something happens) though the laser scanner configuration can also be affected altering further the safety of the device.
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 confidenceA safety PLC contains a default password that is documented in user manuals and is easily discoverable. An attacker with knowledge of this default password can upload a manipulated program to the safety PLC that disables the emergency stop function, creating a critical safety hazard. The laser scanner configuration may also be altered, further compromising device safety.
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<= 2.8.1.1all versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify robot model and firmware versionAccess the robot's web interface or control panel and navigate to System Info or About to retrieve the exact model number and firmware version. Compare against the affected list: Mir100 with firmware <= 2.8.1.1, or any Mir200, Mir250, Mir500, Mir1000, or Easyrobotics Er200, Er Lite, Er Flex.Affected if The robot is any Mir100 with firmware 2.8.1.1 or lower, or any Mir200/250/500/1000, or any Easyrobotics model listed.
-
Locate the default password documentationCheck the user manual or technical documentation provided with the robot for the documented default password. This is typically found in the safety PLC or robot configuration section of the manual.Affected if A default password is documented in publicly available manuals.
-
Verify if default password is still activeAttempt to access the safety PLC programming interface or robot administration panel using the documented default password. If authentication succeeds, the default password is still in use.Affected if The default password authenticates successfully without being changed.
-
Check emergency stop function access controlsExamine the safety PLC program configuration to determine if the emergency stop function can be modified without elevated privileges or additional authentication beyond the default password.Affected if The emergency stop function is accessible or modifiable using only the default credentials.
-
Verify laser scanner configuration protectionAccess the safety system configuration or laser scanner settings through the robot interface and check if changes can be made without strong authentication or are protected by the same default credentials.Affected if Laser scanner configuration can be altered using default credentials or is unprotected.
A user is affected if they operate any of the listed robot models, the documented default password is still active, and safety functions (emergency stop, laser scanner) are accessible or modifiable using that default password.
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 dataImmediately change the default password to a strong, unique password following industrial control system security best practices, and implement proper access control mechanisms to prevent unauthorized changes to safety-critical systems.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-10276 — 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-2020-10276 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