Public Key Cryptography Standards \#1Application · Ietf

CVE-2020-20950

MEDIUM · 5.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2021-01-19
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 2018-11-26 or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Bleichenbacher's attack on PKCS #1 v1.5 padding for RSA in Microchip Libraries for Applications 2018-11-26 All up to 2018-11-26. The vulnerability can allow one to use Bleichenbacher's oracle attack to decrypt an encrypted ciphertext by making successive queries to the server using the vulnerable library, resulting in remote information disclosure.

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 confidence

This is a classic Bleichenbacher oracle attack vulnerability in the RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 padding implementation within Microchip Libraries for Applications. Attackers can decrypt RSA ciphertexts by making successive oracle queries that exploit timing differences or error message differences in the server's responses, effectively performing adaptive chosen-ciphertext attacks to gradually recover the plaintext.

MitigationReplace the vulnerable RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 implementation with a constant-time implementation or migrate to OAEP padding, and ensure the server returns identical responses/timing for all decryption failures to eliminate the oracle.

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
Public Key Cryptography Standards \#1Application
Affected:= 1.5
Microchip Libraries For ApplicationsApplication
Affected:<= 2018-11-26

CVSS 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
High
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate Microchip Libraries for Applications installation
    Search the system for MLA installation directories (commonly at /microchip_libraries/, /mla/, or under Program Files/Microchip on Windows). Check for a version file or manifest named version.h, version.txt, or a build date timestamp.
    Affected if The MLA version is dated 2018-11-26 or earlier, or no version is found but the library directory exists with RSA-related code.
  2. Identify RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 usage in configuration
    Search project configuration files (XML, .c, .h files) for references to RSA_PKCS1_V15, RSA_PKCS1_V1_5, or explicit mentions of PKCS1 padding mode. Also check for wolfCrypt or legacy RSA API calls.
    Affected if RSA is configured to use PKCS#1 v1.5 padding instead of OAEP or PSS.
  3. Inspect RSA decryption implementation for oracle leakage
    Examine the RSA decryption source code in the MLA crypto library (commonly in crypto/RSA or wolfcrypt modules). Look for conditional error handling that returns different responses for padding validation failures versus other errors.
    Affected if The RSA decryption code returns distinct error messages or timing differences based on padding oracle conditions (e.g., 'padding check failed' vs 'invalid signature' vs 'decryption error').
  4. Verify error response uniformity
    Test or audit the RSA decryption code paths. All decryption failures (whether due to padding, key mismatch, or other causes) should return identical error codes and response times to prevent oracle leakage.
    Affected if Different error conditions produce different HTTP responses, error codes, or observable timing variations.

The environment is affected if Microchip Libraries for Applications version 2018-11-26 or earlier is present AND RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 padding is enabled with non-uniform error responses that could serve as a Bleichenbacher oracle.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 2018-11-26
Interim mitigation

Replace the vulnerable RSA PKCS#1 v1.5 implementation with a constant-time implementation or migrate to OAEP padding, and ensure the server returns identical responses/timing for all decryption failures to eliminate the oracle.

Fix this in Public Key Cryptography Standards \#1 Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,600
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-20950 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-20950 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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