CVE-2020-13870
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in the Comments plugin before 1.5.5 for Craft CMS. There is stored XSS via an asset volume name.
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 confidenceThe Comments plugin before version 1.5.5 for Craft CMS contains a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript into the asset volume name field, which is then stored and executed when other users view or interact with the affected volume name in the CMS admin interface.
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< 1.5.5CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 if Verbb Comments plugin is installedCheck your Craft CMS installation for the presence of the Verbb Comments plugin. This can be done via the Craft CMS control panel under Plugins, or by checking the /vendor/verbb/comments directory or composer.json in your project.Affected if The plugin is installed and in use on the Craft CMS site.
-
Determine the installed version of Verbb CommentsLocate the version number of the Comments plugin. In Craft CMS, this is typically visible in the Plugins section of the control panel, or check the composer.json file in your project which lists the installed version under require -> verbb/comments.Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 1.5.5 (e.g., 1.5.4, 1.5.3, etc.). Compare your version to the affected range: < 1.5.5.
-
Verify if asset volumes are configuredIn the Craft CMS control panel, navigate to Settings -> Assets -> Volumes. Check if any asset volumes have been created and configured, as the vulnerability exists in the asset volume name field.Affected if Asset volumes are configured and in use within the CMS.
-
Inspect asset volume name entries for suspicious contentExamine the database table that stores asset volume information (typically the volumes table). Look for any volume name entries containing HTML, script tags, or JavaScript event handlers that may indicate injected XSS payloads.Affected if Any asset volume name field contains raw HTML, script tags, or JavaScript code without proper encoding.
You are affected if the Verbb Comments plugin version is below 1.5.5 AND asset volumes are configured with potentially malicious content in their name fields.
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 data1.5.5
Update the Craft CMS Comments plugin to version 1.5.5 or later, which includes proper input sanitization for asset volume names to prevent XSS injection.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-13870 — 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-2020-13870 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