CVE-2020-13387
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 · uneditedPexip Infinity before 23.4 has a lack of input validation, leading to temporary denial of service via H.323.
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 confidencePexip Infinity versions prior to 23.4 contain a lack of input validation vulnerability in the H.323 protocol handling. This allows remote attackers to cause a temporary denial of service by sending specially crafted H.323 messages that trigger the validation failure.
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< 23.4CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Check Pexip Infinity versionLog into the Pexip Infinity admin interface and navigate to 'About' or 'System > Overview' to view the installed version number. Alternatively, use the command line: 'pexip --version' or check the web UI footer.Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 23.4 (e.g., 23.3, 23.2, etc.)
-
Verify H.323 protocol is enabledIn the Pexip Infinity admin interface, go to 'Call Routing > Call Routing Profiles' or 'Locations > [Location] > Services' to inspect whether H.323 calling is enabled. Check for any H.323-related service configurations.Affected if H.323 protocol calling is enabled and the version is prior to 23.4
-
Review H.323 gateway settingsNavigate to 'Call Routing > H.323' or 'Conferencing > H.323 Gatekeeper' in the admin interface to review H.323 gateway or gatekeeper configuration settings.Affected if An H.323 gateway or gatekeeper is configured and the version is prior to 23.4
A user is affected if they are running Pexip Infinity version below 23.4 AND have H.323 protocol calling or gateway functionality enabled in their deployment.
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 data23.4
Upgrade Pexip Infinity to version 23.4 or later to obtain the fixed codebase with proper input validation for H.323 protocol messages.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-13387 — 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-2020-13387 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