CVE-2020-2013
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 · uneditedA cleartext transmission of sensitive information vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS Panorama that discloses an authenticated PAN-OS administrator's PAN-OS session cookie. When an administrator issues a context switch request into a managed firewall with an affected PAN-OS Panorama version, their PAN-OS session cookie is transmitted over cleartext to the firewall. An attacker with the ability to intercept this network traffic between the firewall and Panorama can access the administrator's account and further manipulate devices managed by Panorama. This issue affects: PAN-OS 7.1 versions earlier than 7.1.26; PAN-OS 8.1 versions earlier than 8.1.13; PAN-OS 9.0 versions earlier than 9.0.6; PAN-OS 9.1 versions earlier than 9.1.1; All version of PAN-OS 8.0;
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 confidencePAN-OS Panorama transmits authenticated administrator session cookies in cleartext when an admin performs a context switch to a managed firewall. An attacker with network interception capabilities between Panorama and the firewall can capture these cookies and hijack the admin session, gaining full access to manipulate managed devices.
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, < 9.0.6>= 9.1.0, < 9.1.1CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 Panorama appliance versionLog into the Panorama web UI and navigate to Dashboard > System > General or use the CLI command 'show system info' to view the running PAN-OS versionAffected if The PAN-OS version falls within 7.1.0-7.1.26, 8.0.0-8.0.20, 8.1.0-8.1.12, 9.0.0-9.0.5, or 9.1.0-9.1.0
-
Determine if managed firewalls are connectedIn Panorama web UI, go to Panorama > Managed Devices > Summary to list all firewalls and device groups managed by this Panorama instanceAffected if One or more managed firewalls or device groups are configured, indicating the context switch feature could be used
-
Verify admin accounts with context switch accessIn Panorama web UI, navigate to Panorama > Administrators and review admin accounts. Check each admin's Device Group and Firewall Access settings to see if they have permission to switch context to managed devicesAffected if Any administrator account has Device Group or Firewall access rights that permit context switching to managed devices
-
Inspect network traffic between Panorama and managed firewallsUse a network packet capture tool on the link between Panorama and a managed firewall, then trigger a context switch by logging in as an admin with managed device access. Analyze the captured traffic for cookie values transmitted in cleartext (unencrypted HTTP)Affected if Session cookies or authentication tokens are visible in plain text within network captures between Panorama and managed firewalls
You are affected if your Panorama runs a PAN-OS version within the affected ranges AND has managed firewalls configured with admins who can perform context switches, with unencrypted traffic flowing between Panorama and those devices.
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 data8.1.139.0.69.1.1
Upgrade PAN-OS Panorama to version 7.1.26, 8.1.13, 9.0.6, 9.1.1 or later. Additionally, implement network segmentation and TLS inspection to prevent traffic interception between Panorama and managed firewalls.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $7,360.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-2013 — 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-2020-2013 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