CVE-2020-12496
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 · uneditedEndress+Hauser Ecograph T (Neutral/Private Label) (RSG35, ORSG35) and Memograph M (Neutral/Private Label) (RSG45, ORSG45) with Firmware version V2.0.0 and above is prone to exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor. The firmware release has a dynamic token for each request submitted to the server, which makes repeating requests and analysis complex enough. Nevertheless, it's possible and during the analysis it was discovered that it also has an issue with the access-control matrix on the server-side. It was found that a user with low rights can get information from endpoints that should not be available to this user.
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 confidenceEndress+Hauser Ecograph T and Memograph M data loggers with firmware V2.0.0+ contain a server-side access control flaw where low-privilege users can access sensitive endpoints that should be restricted to higher-privileged roles, enabling unauthorized information disclosure despite the presence of dynamic tokens.
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< 2.0.0< 2.0.0< 2.0.0< 2.0.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 device model and firmware versionAccess the device web interface or check the system information page. Look for the specific model number (Rsg35, Rsg45, Orsg35, Orsg45) and the installed firmware version in the device settings or status menu.Affected if The model is one of Rsg35, Rsg45, Orsg35, or Orsg45 AND the firmware version is below 2.0.0.
-
Verify if low-privilege user accounts existLog into the device using a standard user account (not admin/root). Check the user management or account settings to confirm whether standard or low-privilege role accounts are configured on the device.Affected if Standard or low-privilege user accounts are configured on the device.
-
Test access to sensitive endpoints with low-privilege accountUsing a low-privilege account, attempt to access endpoints that should be restricted to administrative roles, such as configuration pages, system logs, diagnostic data, or user management interfaces. Note which sensitive endpoints are accessible.Affected if A low-privilege user can access endpoints that should require higher privileges (admin-only or restricted).
-
Confirm dynamic token mechanism is presentInspect the web interface or API responses to verify that the device uses dynamic tokens (session tokens, CSRF tokens, or similar authentication tokens) for request validation.Affected if The device implements dynamic tokens but access control still fails to restrict low-privilege users from sensitive endpoints.
A user is affected if they have a device model Rsg35, Rsg45, Orsg35, or Orsg45 with firmware version below 2.0.0 AND low-privilege users can access sensitive administrative endpoints despite the presence of dynamic token-based authentication.
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 data2.0.0
Apply vendor firmware updates when available; meanwhile, isolate affected devices on restricted network segments and implement additional access controls to limit exposure of sensitive endpoints to authorized roles only.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-12496 — 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-2020-12496 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