DatabaseDatabase / datastore · Jenkins
CVE-2020-2241
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 cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Jenkins database Plugin 1.6 and earlier allows attackers to connect to an attacker-specified database server using attacker-specified credentials.
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 confidenceA cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Jenkins database Plugin version 1.6 and earlier allows authenticated users to be tricked into connecting to an attacker-specified database server using attacker-specified credentials. The lack of CSRF protection enables attackers to craft malicious requests that execute with the privileges of an authenticated user.
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
DatabaseDatabase / datastore
<= 1.6CVSS 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.
-
Verify Database Plugin is installedNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for 'database', or use the Jenkins CLI: java -jar jenkins-cli.jar list-plugins databaseAffected if Database Plugin appears in the installed plugins list
-
Determine the installed Database Plugin versionIn the Manage Plugins > Installed tab, find the Database Plugin and note the version number displayed in the 'Version' column, or check the plugin's WEB-INF/manifest.mf file in the Jenkins war fileAffected if Version is 1.6 or lower (e.g., 1.6, 1.5, 1.4, etc.)
-
Confirm Jenkins user authentication is requiredVerify that the Jenkins instance requires authentication. Check if anonymous users have Overall/Read permission in Manage Jenkins > Configure Global Security > AuthorizationAffected if Authenticated users can access Jenkins and the Database Plugin functionality is available to them
-
Check if CSRF protection is enabled (defense-in-depth)Navigate to Manage Jenkins > Configure Global Security and verify if 'CSRF Protection' is enabled under the Security Configuration sectionAffected if CSRF protection is disabled (this is not required for the vulnerability to exist but affects exploitability)
A user is affected if the Jenkins Database Plugin is installed at version 1.6 or earlier and authenticated users have access to the plugin's database connection features.
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 dataUpgrade the Jenkins database Plugin to a version newer than 1.6. Additionally, ensure Jenkins CSRF protection is enabled as a defense-in-depth measure.
Fix this in Database
Scoped from the published advisory
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-2241 — 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-2020-2241 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