Cloudforms Management EngineApplication · Redhat
CVE-2020-14296
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 · uneditedRed Hat CloudForms 4.7 and 5 was vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) flaw. With the access to add Ansible Tower provider, an attacker could scan and attack systems from the internal network which are not normally accessible.
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 confidenceRed Hat CloudForms 4.7 and 5 contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the Ansible Tower provider feature. An authenticated attacker with access to add an Ansible Tower provider can cause the CloudForms server to make arbitrary requests to internal network resources, enabling network reconnaissance and attacks against systems not directly accessible from the internet.
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
Cloudforms Management EngineApplication
= 4.7= 5.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Determine installed CloudForms versionNavigate to the CloudForms web UI settings (Settings > Configuration > Diagnostic > Server) or check the /var/www/miq/vmdb/VERSION file to identify the exact version numberAffected if The installed version is 4.7 or 5.0 (or falls within the 4.7.x to 4.7 or 5.0 to 5.0.x range)
-
Verify Ansible Tower provider feature is availableCheck if the Ansible Tower provider feature is present in the CloudForms UI under Infrastructure > Providers or via the API endpoint /api/providers?type=AnsibleTowerAffected if Ansible Tower provider type is listed and available in the provider add dialog
-
Identify users with provider creation permissionsReview CloudForms user roles and groups in Settings > Access Control > Users and Groups. Check for roles with provider-specific privileges such as ems_new (create) or ems_operations permissions for Ansible Tower providersAffected if Any authenticated user or group has permissions to add/edit Ansible Tower providers (ems_new, ems_operations roles)
-
Check for existing Ansible Tower providersQuery the providers inventory via API: GET /api/providers?type=AnsibleTower, or manually inspect Infrastructure > Providers in the web UI for any configured Ansible Tower providersAffected if An Ansible Tower provider has been configured in the environment
You are affected if your CloudForms version is 4.7 or 5.0 AND at least one user has permission to add Ansible Tower providers, as this combination enables the SSRF attack vector.
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 dataApply Red Hat security updates for CloudForms to patch the SSRF vulnerability, and consider implementing network segmentation or access controls to limit which users can add providers.
Fix this in Cloudforms Management Engine
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-14296 — 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-2020-14296 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