CVE-2020-1810
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 · uneditedThere is a weak algorithm vulnerability in some Huawei products. The affected products use the RSA algorithm in the SSL key exchange algorithm which have been considered as a weak algorithm. Attackers may exploit this vulnerability to leak some information.
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 confidenceHuawei products using RSA algorithm in SSL key exchange are vulnerable. RSA key exchange is considered cryptographically weak and can allow attackers to leak some information through attacks on the weak cryptographic primitive.
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= v100r003c00spc600= v100r003c10spc100= v100r005c00spc200= v100r005c00spc300= v100r005c10hp0001= v100r005c10spc100= v100r005c10spc200= v100r006c00= v200r001c00= v200r002c01= v200r002c10= v200r002c20= v200r005c00spc500= v200r005c03= v200r006c00spc100= v200r006c00spc300= v200r006c00spc500= v200r007c00spc100= v200r007c00spc500= v200r005c00spc500= v200r005c01CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/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 the product modelLog into the device CLI and run display device to confirm the model is Cloudengine 12800, S5700, or S6700Affected if The model is not one of these three, the device is not affected by this CVE
-
Check the firmware versionRun display version in the device CLI to obtain the current firmware version numberAffected if The installed version exactly matches one of the listed affected versions: for Cloudengine 12800 (v100r003c00spc600, v100r003c10spc100, v100r005c00spc200, v100r005c00spc300, v100r005c10hp0001, v100r005c10spc100, v100r005c10spc200, v100r006c00, v200r001c00, v200r002c01, v200r002c10, v200r002c20); for
-
Verify SSL/TLS configuration for RSA key exchangeRun display ssl policy or display server ssl policy to examine the SSL/TLS policy configuration; look for the key-exchange or cipher configuration to see if RSA key exchange is explicitly enabled or listedAffected if RSA key exchange is configured or enabled in the SSL/TLS policy, as this is the vulnerable configuration
The device is affected only if it is a Cloudengine 12800, S5700, or S6700 running an exact affected firmware version AND has RSA key exchange enabled in its SSL/TLS configuration.
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 dataDisable RSA key exchange in SSL/TLS configurations and use stronger key exchange algorithms such as ECDHE or DHE. If RSA must be used, ensure minimum 2048-bit key sizes.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-1810 — 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-2020-1810 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