CVE-2020-17454
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 · uneditedWSO2 API Manager 3.1.0 and earlier has reflected XSS on the "publisher" component's admin interface. More precisely, it is possible to inject an XSS payload into the owner POST parameter, which does not filter user inputs. By putting an XSS payload in place of a valid Owner Name, a modal box appears that writes an error message concatenated to the injected payload (without any form of data encoding). This can also be exploited via CSRF.
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 confidenceWSO2 API Manager 3.1.0 and earlier contains a reflected XSS vulnerability in the publisher admin interface. The owner POST parameter accepts user input without filtering, and when an XSS payload is provided as the Owner Name, the error message concatenates the injected payload without proper output encoding, causing the payload to execute in the user's browser.
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<= 3.1.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/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 WSO2 API Manager installationLocate the WSO2 API Manager installation directory on the system. Common locations include /opt/wso2, /usr/local/wso2, or C:\Program Files\wso2 on Windows. Check for the presence of the api-manager directory or wso2am startup scripts.Affected if WSO2 API Manager is not installed on the system.
-
Check the installed versionOpen the product's release.info or version file typically found in the installation directory, or run the product and check the admin console footer which displays the version number.Affected if The installed version is 3.1.0 or any earlier version.
-
Confirm publisher interface is accessibleAttempt to access the WSO2 API Manager Publisher interface, typically at a URL path like /publisher or /apipublisher. The exact URL depends on your deployment configuration.Affected if The Publisher interface is not accessible or not configured.
-
Test the owner parameter for XSS vulnerabilitySubmit a crafted POST request to the Publisher interface with an XSS payload in the 'owner' parameter, such as <script>alert(1)</script>. This can be done via browser developer tools or an HTTP proxy. Observe whether the payload is reflected unencoded in any error message displayed back.Affected if The owner parameter accepts the XSS payload and reflects it unencoded in an error message displayed in the browser.
A user is affected if WSO2 API Manager version 3.1.0 or earlier is installed and the Publisher interface is accessible with the owner parameter reflecting unencoded input.
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 dataImplement input validation on the owner parameter and ensure all user-supplied data is properly encoded before being displayed in error messages or any user-facing output.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-17454 — 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-2020-17454 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