CVE-2020-1818
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 are multiple out of bounds (OOB) read vulnerabilities in the implementation of the Common Open Policy Service (COPS) protocol of some Huawei products. The specific decoding function may occur out-of-bounds read when processes an incoming data packet. Successful exploit of these vulnerabilities may disrupt service on the affected device. (Vulnerability ID: HWPSIRT-2018-12275,HWPSIRT-2018-12276,HWPSIRT-2018-12277,HWPSIRT-2018-12278,HWPSIRT-2018-12279,HWPSIRT-2018-12280 and HWPSIRT-2018-12289) The seven vulnerabilities have been assigned seven Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) IDs: CVE-2020-1818, CVE-2020-1819, CVE-2020-1820, CVE-2020-1821, CVE-2020-1822, CVE-2020-1823 and CVE-2020-1824.
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 confidenceMultiple out-of-bounds (OOB) read vulnerabilities exist in the Common Open Policy Service (COPS) protocol implementation of affected Huawei products. The decoding function processes incoming data packets and can read beyond buffer boundaries when parsing malformed input. Successful exploitation may cause the device to read invalid memory locations, leading to service disruption or 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= v500r001c30= v500r001c60= v500r005c00= v500r002c00= v500r002c20= v500r005c00= v500r001c30= v500r001c60= v500r005c00= v500r001c30= v500r001c60= v500r005c00= v500r001c60= v500r005c00= v500r001c30= v500r001c60= v500r005c00= v500r001c30= v500r001c60= v500r005c00= v500r001c30= v500r005c00CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
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 device model and firmware versionAccess the device management console or use CLI command such as 'display version' or 'show system-info' to retrieve the exact model number and firmware version installed.Affected if The firmware version matches one of the affected versions listed: v500r001c30, v500r001c60, v500r002c00, v500r002c20, or v500r005c00 for the specific product line.
-
Verify COPS protocol is enabledCheck the device configuration for COPS protocol settings. Use CLI command like 'display current-configuration | include cops' or access the security policy configuration to see if COPS is explicitly enabled.Affected if The COPS protocol feature is enabled in the device configuration.
-
Check for active COPS listenersUse network diagnostic commands to check if the device is listening on COPS ports. Common COPS port is TCP 3288. Run 'display tcp status' or 'display ip socket' to identify listening services.Affected if The device has an open listening socket on the COPS port (typically TCP 3288) indicating the service is active.
-
Confirm COPS traffic handling is activeReview the device security logs or traffic statistics for COPS protocol usage. Use commands like 'display logs' or check traffic counters for COPS-related entries.Affected if The device is actively processing or has recently processed COPS protocol traffic.
The device is affected if it runs one of the listed firmware versions AND has the COPS protocol enabled and listening for COPS traffic.
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 security patches for the COPS protocol vulnerabilities. If patches are unavailable, consider disabling the COPS protocol or implementing network-level access controls to limit exposure to untrusted traffic sources.
- 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-2020-1818 — 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-2020-1818 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