CVE-2020-10760
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 use-after-free flaw was found in all samba LDAP server versions before 4.10.17, before 4.11.11, before 4.12.4 used in a AC DC configuration. A Samba LDAP user could use this flaw to crash samba.
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 confidenceUse-after-free vulnerability in Samba LDAP server affecting Active Directory Domain Controller configurations. Authenticated LDAP users can trigger a crash via the memory corruption flaw in versions before 4.10.17, 4.11.11, and 4.12.4.
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= 18.04= 19.10= 20.04= 31>= 4.5.0, < 4.10.17>= 4.11.0, < 4.11.11>= 4.12.0, < 4.12.4= 15.1= 15.2CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Verify Samba is installedRun 'dpkg -l | grep samba' (Debian/Ubuntu) or 'rpm -qa | grep samba' (RHEL/Fedora) or check for /usr/sbin/smbdAffected if Samba is not installed, then not affected. If installed, proceed to next check.
-
Determine installed Samba versionRun 'samba --version' or 'smbd --version' to obtain the exact version numberAffected if Version is less than 4.10.17, or between 4.11.0-4.11.10, or between 4.12.0-4.12.3, then vulnerable. Otherwise, not affected.
-
Confirm LDAP server is runningCheck for active LDAP-related processes: 'ps aux | grep ldap' or 'systemctl status slapd' (OpenLDAP) or look for samba 'ldap' processesAffected if LDAP server daemon is not running, then not affected by this specific LDAP server flaw.
-
Check if configured as Active Directory Domain ControllerExamine smb.conf for 'server role = active directory domain controller' or run 'samba-tool domain info 127.0.0.1' to query AD statusAffected if System is NOT configured as an AD DC, then not affected. The flaw specifically targets AD DC configurations.
System is affected only if Samba version falls within the vulnerable ranges AND the LDAP server is active AND the system is configured as an Active Directory Domain Controller.
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 data4.10.174.11.114.12.4
Upgrade Samba to version 4.10.17 or later, 4.11.11 or later, or 4.12.4 or later. Plan maintenance window for DC upgrade to minimize disruption.
- 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-2020-10760 — 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-2020-10760 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