CVE-2020-17360
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 issue was discovered in ReadyTalk Avian 1.2.0. The vm::arrayCopy method defined in classpath-common.h contains multiple boundary checks that are performed to prevent out-of-bounds memory read/write. However, two of these boundary checks contain an integer overflow that leads to a bypass of these checks, and out-of-bounds read/write. NOTE: This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer
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 confidenceThe vm::arrayCopy method in ReadyTalk Avian 1.2.0 contains boundary checks meant to prevent out-of-bounds memory access, but two of these checks suffer from integer overflow vulnerabilities that allow bypassing the safeguards, enabling out-of-bounds read/write operations.
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= 1.2.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 if ReadyTalk Avian JVM is in useSearch for Avian JAR files, libraries, or runtime components in the application environment. Look for process listings, dependencies, or classpath entries referencing 'avian' or 'com.readytalk.avian'. Check application manifests or build configurations for Avian as a JVM dependency.Affected if ReadyTalk Avian JVM is present in the environment
-
Verify the Avian version is 1.2.0Examine the Avian JAR manifest, filename, version metadata, or library build information. Compare the installed version against the affected version = 1.2.0.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.2.0
-
Identify usage of vm::arrayCopy methodInspect application code or any native bindings that invoke the internal JVM method vm::arrayCopy. Look for array copy operations that may be passing user-controlled parameters to this method.Affected if The vm::arrayCopy method is being called with user-controlled or untrusted array parameters
Environment is affected if ReadyTalk Avian version 1.2.0 is present AND the vm::arrayCopy method is used with the vulnerable boundary check logic handling array parameters.
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 dataSince the product is unsupported, pursue alternative JVM implementations or apply compensating controls such as network segmentation and input validation at higher layers; if source is available, fix the boundary check logic to properly validate against integer overflow before performing size calculations.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-17360 — 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-2020-17360 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