CVE-2020-15000
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 · uneditedA PIN management problem was discovered on Yubico YubiKey 5 devices 5.2.0 to 5.2.6. OpenPGP has three passwords: Admin PIN, Reset Code, and User PIN. The Reset Code is used to reset the User PIN, but it is disabled by default. A flaw in the implementation of OpenPGP sets the Reset Code to a known value upon initialization. If the retry counter for the Reset Code is set to non-zero without changing the Reset Code, this known value can be used to reset the User PIN. To set the retry counters, the Admin PIN is required.
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 confidenceOn YubiKey 5 devices (versions 5.2.0-5.2.6), the OpenPGP implementation sets the Reset Code to a known default value during initialization. If a user enables the Reset Code functionality (sets retry counter to non-zero using the Admin PIN) without changing this default Reset Code, an attacker with physical access can use the known default value to reset the User PIN and gain access to the OpenPGP credentials.
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>= 5.2.0, <= 5.2.6CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Check YubiKey firmware versionConnect the YubiKey and run `ykman device info` or `ykman --version` to retrieve the firmware version. Alternatively, use `gpg --card-status` and look for the version in the card details.Affected if The firmware version falls between 5.2.0 and 5.2.6 inclusive.
-
Verify OpenPGP application is loadedRun `ykman openpgp info` or `gpg --card-status` to confirm the OpenPGP application is active on the YubiKey.Affected if OpenPGP application is present and initialized on the device.
-
Check Reset Code retry counter statusRun `ykman openpgp reset-code retry-counter` to query the current retry counter setting for the Reset Code feature.Affected if The retry counter is set to a value greater than 0 (Reset Code functionality is enabled).
A YubiKey is affected if it runs firmware 5.2.0-5.2.6, has OpenPGP initialized, and has the Reset Code feature enabled (retry counter > 0) without the Reset Code having been changed from its default value.
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 dataUsers should either keep the Reset Code retry counter at 0 (disabled, the default) or change the Reset Code to a unique value immediately after initializing the OpenPGP application if enabling the Reset Code feature. Yubico has patched this in version 5.2.7 and later.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-15000 — 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-2020-15000 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