CVE-2020-27576
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 · uneditedMaxum Rumpus 8.2.13 and 8.2.14 is affected by cross-site scripting (XSS). Users are able to create folders in the web application. The folder name is insufficiently validated resulting in a stored cross-site scripting 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 · moderate confidenceMaxum Rumpus versions 8.2.13 and 8.2.14 contain a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the folder creation functionality. The web application fails to properly validate and sanitize folder names provided by users, allowing malicious scripts to be stored and executed when other users view the folder.
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= 8.2.13= 8.2.14CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed Rumpus versionLocate the Rumpus application version information through the software's built-in about panel, version file, or admin interface. Common methods include checking the application menu, looking for a version info file in the installation directory, or accessing the admin dashboard.Affected if The installed version is exactly 8.2.13 or 8.2.14
-
Confirm the web server component is activeVerify that the Rumpus web server service is running and accessible. This can be done by attempting to reach the web interface via the configured port (typically 8080 or 8090 for Rumpus).Affected if The web interface is accessible and the application is accepting HTTP/HTTPS connections for folder management
-
Review existing folders for suspicious contentAccess the folder management section of the Rumpus web interface or use the file system to enumerate all created folders. Inspect folder names for any that contain HTML tags, JavaScript code, or unusual characters that could indicate injection attempts.Affected if Any folder names contain script tags, event handlers, or other XSS payloads such as <script>, javascript:, onerror=, or similar patterns
-
Check folder creation logging or audit recordsIf available, review Rumpus server logs, access logs, or audit trails that record folder creation events. Look for recent folder names that contain special characters or patterns consistent with XSS testing.Affected if Logs show folder creation attempts with characters typical of XSS probes (<, >, ", ', script, img, body, etc.)
You are affected if the installed Rumpus version is 8.2.13 or 8.2.14 AND the web interface is accessible, particularly if folder names with script injection patterns are found in the system.
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 proper input validation and output encoding for folder names to prevent script injection. All user-supplied input should be sanitized on input and escaped on output.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-27576 — 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-2020-27576 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