QualiexApplication · Forlogic

CVE-2020-24030

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2020-09-02
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
ForLogic Qualiex v1 and v3 has weak token expiration. This allows remote unauthenticated privilege escalation and access to sensitive data via token reuse. NOTE: as of 2025-10-14, the Supplier's perspective is that this is "not exploitable in the current implementation. Tokens are properly expired, invalidated, and bound to session context. Attempts to alter the token payload to extend its validity do not affect server-side validation."

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 confidence

ForLogic Qualiex v1 and v3 contained a weak token expiration vulnerability where authentication tokens could be reused beyond their intended lifespan, enabling unauthenticated attackers to escalate privileges and access sensitive data. The vendor claims tokens in the current implementation are properly expired, invalidated, and bound to session context.

MitigationVerify the current installed version of Qualiex and confirm token validation logic enforces proper expiration, invalidation, and session binding; if on legacy versions (v1 or v3), upgrade to the current version.

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
QualiexApplication
Affected:= 1.0= 3.0

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
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

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

  1. Identify installed Qualiex version
    Locate the Qualiex application and retrieve its version number through the application interface, about page, or installation metadata. Common methods include checking the application header, help menu, or system information panel within Qualiex.
    Affected if The installed version is 1.0 or 3.0 specifically, as these are the versions affected by the weak token expiration vulnerability.
  2. Confirm token expiration mechanism exists
    Access the authentication configuration or security settings within Qualiex. Look for settings or code that define token lifetime, expiration periods, or session timeout values.
    Affected if No token expiration mechanism is found, or tokens do not appear to have a defined validity period - indicating they can be reused indefinitely.
  3. Verify token invalidation on logout
    Test the token behavior by authenticating, obtaining a token, logging out, and then attempting to reuse the same token for a new request. Check whether the system rejects the expired token after logout.
    Affected if The same token remains valid after logout, meaning tokens are not being invalidated upon session termination.
  4. Check token binding to session context
    Examine whether tokens are bound to specific session identifiers, IP addresses, or other context variables. Attempt to use a token from a different session or context to see if it is rejected.
    Affected if Tokens can be reused across different sessions or contexts without validation, indicating lack of session binding.

A user is affected if Qualiex version 1.0 or 3.0 is installed and tokens lack proper expiration, invalidation, or session binding controls.

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
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Verify the current installed version of Qualiex and confirm token validation logic enforces proper expiration, invalidation, and session binding; if on legacy versions (v1 or v3), upgrade to the current version.

Fix this in Qualiex Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,120
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,392.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-24030 — 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-2020-24030 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