CVE-2020-1993
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 · uneditedThe GlobalProtect Portal feature in PAN-OS does not set a new session identifier after a successful user login, which allows session fixation attacks, if an attacker is able to control a user's session ID. This issue affects: All PAN-OS 7.1 and 8.0 versions; PAN-OS 8.1 versions earlier than 8.1.14; PAN-OS 9.0 versions earlier than 9.0.8.
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 confidenceThe GlobalProtect Portal in PAN-OS fails to regenerate session identifiers after successful user authentication. This session fixation vulnerability allows an attacker who can control or predict a user's session ID to hijack the authenticated session, as the same session ID persists before and after login.
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>= 7.1.0, <= 7.1.26>= 8.0.0, <= 8.0.20>= 8.1.0, <= 8.1.13>= 9.0.0, <= 9.0.7CVSS 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 PAN-OS versionRun the command 'show system info' in the PAN-OS CLI or check the device dashboard in the web interface. Look for the 'PAN-OS' or 'Version' field showing the installed software version.Affected if The displayed version falls within any of these ranges: 7.1.0 to 7.1.26, 8.0.0 to 8.0.20, 8.1.0 to 8.1.13, or 9.0.0 to 9.0.7
-
Confirm GlobalProtect Portal is configuredIn the PAN-OS web interface, go to GlobalProtect > Portals or run 'show global-protect global-protect-portal' in the CLI to list configured portal configurations.Affected if Any GlobalProtect Portal configuration exists (the vulnerability applies to any enabled portal, regardless of whether it is actively used for connections).
-
Verify session handling after authenticationThis requires controlled testing: obtain a session ID from the GlobalProtect Portal login page before authentication, then authenticate with valid credentials and observe whether the session ID changes after successful login. Compare the session cookie or parameter values before and after the login sequence.Affected if The session identifier remains identical before and after successful user authentication (session ID is not regenerated).
You are affected if your PAN-OS version is 7.1.0-7.1.26, 8.0.0-8.0.20, 8.1.0-8.1.13, or 9.0.0-9.0.7 AND you have a GlobalProtect Portal configured, AND the session ID does not change after authentication.
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 the vendor-supplied patches: update PAN-OS 8.1 to version 8.1.14 or later, and PAN-OS 9.0 to version 9.0.8 or later. Earlier versions (7.1, 8.0) should be upgraded to a supported release branch.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-1993 — 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-2020-1993 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