Debian LinuxOperating system · Debian
CVE-2020-11039
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 · uneditedIn FreeRDP less than or equal to 2.0.0, when using a manipulated server with USB redirection enabled (nearly) arbitrary memory can be read and written due to integer overflows in length checks. This has been patched in 2.1.0.
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 confidenceInteger overflow vulnerabilities in length check logic within FreeRDP's USB redirection feature (versions <= 2.0.0) allow a malicious or manipulated RDP server to read and write nearly arbitrary memory on the client system. The overflow occurs when calculating buffer sizes for USB device communication, bypassing intended bounds.
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
Debian LinuxOperating system
= 10.0< 2.1.0= 15.1CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L
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.
-
Check if FreeRDP is installedRun 'freerdp-version' or 'freerdp -version' to display the installed FreeRDP client versionAffected if FreeRDP is not installed or the command fails
-
Identify the exact FreeRDP versionRun 'dpkg -l | grep freerdp' on Debian, 'rpm -qa | grep freerdp' on openSUSE, or check the binary version outputAffected if The version number returned is less than 2.1.0 (for example, 2.0.0, 1.2.0, etc.)
-
Locate FreeRDP client configuration filesLook for configuration files in ~/.config/freerdp/, /etc/freerdp/, or the user's home directory for .rdp files containing client settingsAffected if Configuration files exist and contain USB redirection settings
-
Check for USB redirection being enabledInspect the configuration files or .rdp connection files for the /usb redirect flag, /a:usb flag, or 'USB' redirection settingsAffected if USB redirection is explicitly enabled in any configuration or connection profile
-
Verify the libusb or USB redirection module is loadedCheck running processes for freerdp with USB redirection active, or inspect /usr/lib/freerdp/ for usb*.so modulesAffected if USB redirection modules are present and the client has active or configured USB redirection sessions
You are affected if FreeRDP version is below 2.1.0 AND USB redirection is enabled or configured in any connection profile.
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 data2.1.0
Upgrade FreeRDP installations to version 2.1.0 or later. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, disable USB redirection in FreeRDP client settings as an interim mitigation.
Fix this in Debian Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-11039 — 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-2020-11039 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