CVE-2020-22273
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 · uneditedNeoflex Video Subscription System Version 2.0 is affected by CSRF which allows the Website's Settings to be changed (such as Payment Settings)
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 confidenceNeoflex Video Subscription System v2.0 lacks anti-CSRF protections on administrative settings forms, allowing attackers to craft malicious requests that trick authenticated administrators into unknowingly modifying website settings including payment configurations.
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= 2.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/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.
-
Confirm Neoflex Video Subscription System installationLook for the Neoflex Video Subscription System in the web application directory or check for characteristic file paths related to this product (e.g., /neoflex/, /video-subscription/, or check the product's index/login page)Affected if The application is the Neoflex Video Subscription System from Creativeitem
-
Verify installed version is 2.0Check the application version information - typically found in the source code, a version file, or the application's admin panel/about pageAffected if The installed version is exactly 2.0
-
Inspect admin forms for CSRF token fieldsLog into the administrative interface and navigate to settings forms (especially payment configuration or site settings). View the page source or inspect form elements to check for hidden CSRF token fields or anti-CSRF token parametersAffected if Administrative forms lack CSRF token fields and the application does not validate anti-CSRF tokens on form submission
-
Test for CSRF protection via form submission behaviorSubmit an administrative settings form without the expected CSRF token and observe whether the request is accepted or rejected by the serverAffected if Forms accept state-changing requests without requiring valid CSRF tokens
You are affected if the Neoflex Video Subscription System version 2.0 is installed and its administrative settings forms lack CSRF token validation.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens on all state-changing forms and validate them server-side, supplemented with SameSite cookie attributes and referer header validation for defense in depth.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-22273 — 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-2020-22273 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