CVE-2020-16224
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 · uneditedIn Patient Information Center iX (PICiX) Versions C.02, C.03, the software parses a formatted message or structure but does not handle or incorrectly handles a length field that is inconsistent with the actual length of the associated data, causing the application on the surveillance station to restart.
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 confidenceIn Patient Information Center iX (PICiX) versions C.02 and C.03, the application fails to properly validate length fields when parsing formatted messages or data structures. When a length field is inconsistent with actual data length, the parsing error causes the surveillance station application to restart, resulting in denial of service.
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= c.02= c.03CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 installed PICiX versionAccess the PICiX administration interface or system information panel to determine the current software version. This is typically found in System Settings or About section of the application.Affected if The installed version is C.02 or C.03 exactly as listed in the affected versions.
-
Verify surveillance station application statusCheck if the surveillance station application component is running. This may be visible in the PICiX system health monitor, services panel, or application status dashboard.Affected if The surveillance station application is active and running, as this is the specific component vulnerable to the parsing error.
-
Monitor for application restartsReview system logs, application event logs, or the PICiX audit logs for unexpected surveillance station restarts or crashes. Check timestamps and frequency of restarts.Affected if Unexpected or unexplained restarts of the surveillance station application are occurring, which indicates the vulnerability may be triggered.
-
Assess network exposureEvaluate network accessibility of the PICiX surveillance station port or service. Determine if the application is exposed to untrusted network segments.Affected if The surveillance station is network-accessible from outside the protected clinical network, creating potential attack vector.
Your environment is affected if you are running PICiX version C.02 or C.03 and the surveillance station application is active and accessible on the network.
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 vendor-supplied patches for PICiX C.02 and C.03 when available. Until then, restrict network access to the surveillance station and monitor for application restarts as indicators of exploitation.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $4,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-16224 — 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-2020-16224 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