CVE-2020-1719
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 flaw was found in wildfly. The EJBContext principle is not popped back after invoking another EJB using a different Security Domain. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to data confidentiality and integrity. Versions before wildfly 20.0.0.Final are affected.
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 confidenceIn WildFly versions before 20.0.0.Final, the EJBContext principal is not properly restored after invoking an EJB with a different Security Domain. This causes the security context to leak the principal from the called EJB's domain back into the calling EJB's context, potentially leading to unauthorized data access or operations performed under the wrong identity.
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< 20.0.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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.
-
Identify installed WildFly versionRun 'grep -r "JBoss-AS" $WILDFLY_HOME/jboss-modules.jar' or check $WILDFLY_HOME/wildfly-version.txt or check the output of 'java -jar $WILDFLY_HOME/jboss-modules.jar -version'Affected if The version number returned is less than 20.0.0.Final (for example, 19.x, 18.x, 17.x, etc.)
-
Locate EJB deployment descriptorsSearch for deployed EJB JAR files in $WILDFLY_HOME/standalone/deployments/ or check for META-INF/ejb-jar.xml or beans.xml in your application directoriesAffected if Multiple EJB JARs or WARs with EJB modules are deployed
-
Check for Security Domain configuration in jboss-ejb3.xmlSearch for 'security-domain' entries in META-INF/jboss-ejb3.xml files within your deployed applicationsAffected if An EJB references a Security Domain and that domain differs from the caller's configured Security Domain
You are affected if WildFly version is below 20.0.0.Final AND your application uses EJBs that invoke other EJBs configured with different Security Domains.
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 data20.0.0
Upgrade WildFly to version 20.0.0.Final or later to receive the fix for this EJBContext principal leakage issue.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-1719 — 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-2020-1719 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