dbcve.org
JsgamesApplication · Jenkins

CVE-2020-2248

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-09-01
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 0.2 or later.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Jenkins JSGames Plugin 0.2 and earlier evaluates part of a URL as code, resulting in a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability.

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

The Jenkins JSGames Plugin versions 0.2 and earlier contains a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability where part of a URL is evaluated as code, allowing attackers to inject malicious scripts that execute in victims' browsers.

MitigationUpgrade JSGames Plugin to a version newer than 0.2, or implement proper input validation and output encoding on URL parameters before rendering.

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
JsgamesApplication
Affected:<= 0.2

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
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/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 checks

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

  1. Confirm JSGames plugin is installed
    Log into Jenkins and navigate to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed, or use the Jenkins CLI: java -jar jenkins-cli.jar -s http://[jenkins-url] list-plugins
    Affected if JSGames appears in the list of installed plugins
  2. Identify the installed version of JSGames
    In Jenkins UI, find JSGames in the Installed plugins tab and note the Version column; alternatively, examine the plugin's .jpi or .hpi file in $JENKINS_HOME/plugins/ and check its manifest for the version
    Affected if The displayed version is 0.2 or lower (or if version cannot be determined but plugin exists)
  3. Compare version against affected range
    Review the documented version against the affected range: Jenkins Jsgames <= 0.2
    Affected if Installed version is 0.2 or any version earlier than 0.2

You are affected if the JSGames plugin is installed and its version is 0.2 or earlier.

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 0.2
Interim mitigation

Upgrade JSGames Plugin to a version newer than 0.2, or implement proper input validation and output encoding on URL parameters before rendering.

Fix this in Jsgames Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing1.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,090
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-2248 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2020-2248 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