CVE-2020-27264
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 · uneditedIn SOOIL Developments Co., Ltd Diabecare RS, AnyDana-i and AnyDana-A, the communication protocol of the insulin pump and its AnyDana-i and AnyDana-A mobile applications use deterministic keys, which allows unauthenticated, physically proximate attackers to brute-force the keys via Bluetooth Low Energy.
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 confidenceThe Diabecare RS insulin pump and its companion AnyDana-i and AnyDana-A mobile applications use deterministic (static) keys for BLE authentication. Attackers within Bluetooth range can perform offline brute-force attacks against these predictable keys to inject unauthorized commands to the pump, potentially manipulating insulin delivery.
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< 3.0< 3.0< 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify BLE is enabled on the pumpAccess the Diabecare RS pump settings or status menu and confirm the Bluetooth Low Energy radio is active. Alternatively, check if the pump is visible to BLE scanning tools or paired with the companion app.Affected if BLE is currently enabled - the vulnerability requires an active BLE connection to exploit.
-
Locate the firmware version in pump settingsNavigate to the device information or system settings screen on the Diabecare RS insulin pump. Look for a 'Firmware Version', 'Software Version', or 'Device Info' entry that displays a numeric version number.Affected if The displayed firmware version is below 3.0 (for example, 2.x.x or 1.x.x).
-
Check AnyDana-A app versionOpen the AnyDana-A mobile application on the paired Android/iOS device, then go to Settings > About or App Info to view the installed application version.Affected if The companion mobile app is running and the device firmware is version 3.0 or older.
-
Check AnyDana-i app versionOpen the AnyDana-i mobile application, navigate to Settings > About, and record the application version displayed.Affected if The companion mobile app is running and the device firmware is version 3.0 or older.
Your environment is affected if BLE is enabled on the pump AND the firmware version is less than 3.0 for any of the Anydana-A, Anydana-I, or Diabecare RS devices.
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 data3.0
Replace deterministic keys with cryptographically random, session-based keys or implement proper BLE authentication with secure key exchange. Coordinate with the vendor for firmware and application updates, then validate the fix in an isolated environment before deploying to clinical settings.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-27264 — 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-2020-27264 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