CVE-2020-24028
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 · uneditedForLogic Qualiex v1 and v3 allows any authenticated customer to achieve privilege escalation via user creations, password changes, or user permission updates. NOTE: as of 2025-10-14, the Supplier's perspective is that this "does not allow administrative privilege gain. Authorization is enforced server-side, restricting actions to the user’s own permission scope."
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 · moderate confidenceForLogic Qualiex v1 and v3 contains an authorization flaw where any authenticated customer can perform privileged operations including user creation, password changes, and permission modifications beyond their assigned scope, enabling privilege escalation.
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= 1.0= 3.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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 if ForLogic Qualiex is installedCheck system for presence of Qualiex application - look in installed programs list, application directories, or running services related to QualiexAffected if ForLogic Qualiex versions 1.0 or 3.0 are found on the system
-
Confirm the exact version numberCheck the application's version information through the installed software details, about page, or version file included with the applicationAffected if Version is 1.0 or 3.0 specifically (exact match to affected versions)
-
Verify if application uses role-based access controlReview application configuration or database for user role definitions and permission mappingsAffected if No role-based access control is implemented or roles allow users to exceed their assigned permissions
-
Test authorization boundariesUsing a low-privileged test account, attempt to create a new user, change another user's password, or modify permissions outside your assigned scopeAffected if Low-privileged user can successfully perform admin-level operations like user creation, password changes, or permission modifications
-
Check audit logs for privilege escalation attemptsReview application logs for instances where users performed operations outside their documented permission scope
User is affected if ForLogic Qualiex version 1.0 or 3.0 is installed AND low-privileged accounts can perform administrative operations like user creation, password changes, or permission modifications beyond their assigned scope.
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 and enforce server-side authorization checks to verify users have appropriate permissions before allowing user creation, password changes, or permission modifications; follow principle of least privilege.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-24028 — 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-2020-24028 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