Portico Server 1 ClientApplication · Phoenixcontact

CVE-2020-10940

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-03-27
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 3.0.7 or later.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
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
Local Privilege Escalation can occur in PHOENIX CONTACT PORTICO SERVER through 3.0.7 when installed to run as a service.

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

Local privilege escalation vulnerability in PHOENIX CONTACT PORTICO SERVER (versions through 3.0.7) when running as a Windows service. The vulnerability allows a local authenticated attacker to gain elevated privileges, likely due to improper service configuration or insecure service executable permissions that can be exploited to execute arbitrary code with elevated privileges.

MitigationApply vendor patch (upgrade to version beyond 3.0.7), or if no patch available, implement compensating controls such as restricting service account permissions, limiting local access, and applying defense-in-depth measures.

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
Portico Server 1 ClientApplication
Affected:<= 3.0.7
Portico Server 16 ClientApplication
Affected:<= 3.0.7
Portico Server 4 ClientApplication
Affected:<= 3.0.7

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
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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. Identify installed Portico Server version
    Open Windows Control Panel > Programs and Features, or run 'Get-WmiObject Win32_Product | Select-Object Name, Version' in PowerShell to list installed software and locate 'Phoenix Contact Portico Server' with its version number.
    Affected if Version is 3.0.7 or lower (any version through 3.0.7).
  2. Confirm Portico Server is running as a Windows service
    Open Services console (services.msc) or run 'Get-Service | Where-Object {$_.DisplayName -like "*Portico*"}' in PowerShell to check if a Portico service exists and is running.
    Affected if A Portico Server Windows service is installed and running.
  3. Check service executable file permissions
    Locate the service executable (typically in C:\Program Files\Phoenix Contact\Portico Server\ or similar), right-click > Properties > Security tab. Verify that standard users cannot modify or write to the executable file.
    Affected if Non-admin users have Write or Full Control permissions on the service executable, allowing them to replace it with malicious code.
  4. Verify service account privileges
    In Services console, double-click the Portico service > Log On tab. Check whether the service runs under LocalSystem, a domain account, or a local user account with elevated privileges.
    Affected if Service runs under LocalSystem or an account with administrative privileges, allowing executed code to run with elevated rights.

You are affected if Portico Server version 3.0.7 or lower is installed as a Windows service, and the service executable has weak permissions or runs with elevated privileges that a local authenticated attacker could exploit.

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
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 3.0.7
Interim mitigation

Apply vendor patch (upgrade to version beyond 3.0.7), or if no patch available, implement compensating controls such as restricting service account permissions, limiting local access, and applying defense-in-depth measures.

Fix this in Portico Server 1 Client Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $2,000
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,200.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-10940 — 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-2020-10940 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