FedoraOperating system · Fedoraproject
CVE-2020-12050
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 · uneditedSQLiteODBC 0.9996, as packaged for certain Linux distributions as 0.9996-4, has a race condition leading to root privilege escalation because any user can replace a /tmp/sqliteodbc$$ file with new contents that cause loading of an arbitrary library.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceSQLiteODBC 0.9996 has a TOCTOU (time-of-check to time-of-use) race condition in its temporary file handling. The application creates a temporary file in /tmp using a predictable naming pattern (sqliteodbc$$), and between the permission check and library loading, an unprivileged attacker can replace this file with a malicious shared library that gets loaded with root privileges.
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
FedoraOperating system
= 30= 31= 32= 15.0= 0.9996CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check installed SQLiteODBC versionRun 'rpm -q sqliteodbc' (Fedora) or 'rpm -q sqlite-odbc' (openSUSE) or check via package manager to determine the exact version numberAffected if Version is exactly 0.9996
-
Identify SQLiteODBC binary locationRun 'which sqliteodbc' or 'find /usr -name "*sqlite*odbc*" -type f' to locate the SQLiteODBC driver binariesAffected if The binary exists and is the 0.9996 version
-
Inspect /tmp for predictable temporary filesRun 'ls -la /tmp/sqliteodbc*' to check for any temporary files matching the pattern sqliteodbc$$ (where $$ is the PID)Affected if Files matching /tmp/sqliteodbc$$ exist with world-writable permissions
-
Check process privilegesVerify if the SQLiteODBC application or connecting database runs as root or with elevated privileges using 'ps aux | grep -i sqlite' and check the user columnAffected if The process runs as root (UID 0) or with elevated privileges that could load a replaced library
You are affected if SQLiteODBC version 0.9996 is installed and runs with root privileges while creating predictable temp files in /tmp that could be replaced by an unprivileged attacker.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataReplace the predictable /tmp/sqliteodbc$$ file creation with secure temporary file functions (mkstemp() or equivalent) that create files with restrictive permissions in a secure manner, eliminating the window for race condition exploitation.
Fix this in Fedora
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-12050 — 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-2020-12050 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