CVE-2020-14486
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 attacker may bypass permission/authorization checks in OpenClinic GA 5.09.02 and 5.89.05b by ignoring the redirect of a permission failure, which may allow unauthorized execution of commands.
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 confidenceOpenClinic GA versions 5.09.02 and 5.89.05b contain an authorization bypass vulnerability where the application relies on HTTP redirects to deny access to protected resources, but an attacker can ignore these redirects and directly access the protected endpoints, potentially allowing unauthorized command execution.
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= 5.09.02= 5.89.05bCVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Identify OpenClinic GA installed versionLocate the version file or check the admin/about page of the application. Common paths include version files in the installation directory or the application's main page displaying version information.Affected if The installed version matches 5.09.02 or 5.89.05b exactly.
-
Review authorization mechanismExamine the application source code or configuration to determine how access control is implemented. Look for code that uses HTTP redirect responses (HTTP 302/301) to deny access to protected resources.Affected if The application uses redirect-based responses (such as redirecting to a login or error page) as the sole mechanism for denying unauthorized access to protected endpoints.
-
Identify protected endpointsReview the application URL structure and identify endpoints that should require authentication or specific permissions (such as admin functions, data export, or command execution features).Affected if Protected endpoints exist that handle sensitive operations or administrative functions.
-
Test direct access to protected resourcesAttempt to directly access a protected endpoint using a direct HTTP request (bypassing any redirect) without proper authentication tokens or session cookies.Affected if Direct access to a protected endpoint succeeds and returns functionality (not a proper authorization error) when the redirect is ignored or bypassed.
-
Verify server-side authorization enforcementInspect the application code at the target endpoint to confirm whether server-side permission checks occur before executing the action, or whether the code only performs the action after a redirect fails.Affected if The protected endpoint executes its core functionality without first validating user permissions server-side.
You are affected if you run OpenClinic GA version 5.09.02 or 5.89.05b and the application relies on HTTP redirects (rather than server-side permission checks) to control access to protected resources, allowing direct access when redirects are bypassed.
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 dataImplement proper server-side authorization checks that enforce permission validation before executing any action, rather than relying on client-side redirect behavior. All protected functionality should verify user permissions at the point of access.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,680.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-14486 — 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-2020-14486 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