CVE-2020-15369
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 · uneditedSupportlink CLI in Brocade Fabric OS Versions v8.2.1 through v8.2.1d, and 8.2.2 versions before v8.2.2c does not obfuscate the password field, which could expose users’ credentials of the remote server. An authenticated user could obtain the exposed password credentials to gain access to the remote host.
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 Supportlink CLI in Brocade Fabric OS versions v8.2.1 through v8.2.1d and v8.2.2 before v8.2.2c fails to obfuscate password fields when storing or displaying credentials for remote servers. This allows any authenticated user with access to the Supportlink CLI to view plaintext passwords used for remote server connections.
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= 8.2.1= 8.2.1a= 8.2.1b= 8.2.1c= 8.2.1d= 8.2.2= 8.2.2a= 8.2.2a1= 8.2.2bCVSS 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.
-
Check Fabric OS versionRun 'version' or 'firmwareShow' command on the Fabric OS CLI to obtain the installed version stringAffected if The version is 8.2.1, 8.2.1a, 8.2.1b, 8.2.1c, 8.2.1d, 8.2.2, 8.2.2a, 8.2.2a1, or 8.2.2b (versions earlier than 8.2.2c in the 8.2.2 branch) or falls between 8.2.1 and 8.2.1d inclusive
-
Verify Supportlink is configuredRun 'supportlinkShow' or 'supportlinkConfigShow' command to check if any Supportlink configurations existAffected if Supportlink is configured with remote server connections (any entry present)
-
Inspect credential storageRun 'supportlinkConfigShow' and examine the output for any password fields. If available, check configuration files or backup files for the Supportlink configuration.Affected if Passwords appear in plaintext (not masked, asterisks, or obfuscated) in the CLI output or configuration files
The environment is affected if it runs Fabric OS versions 8.2.1 through 8.2.1d or 8.2.2 through 8.2.2b AND has Supportlink configured with remote server credentials that are displayed or stored in plaintext form.
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 the vendor patch (v8.2.2c or later) to remediate the password exposure. If patching is delayed, restrict administrative access to the Supportlink CLI feature to minimize the attack surface.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,848.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-15369 — 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-2020-15369 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