CVE-2020-29548
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in SmarterTools SmarterMail through 100.0.7537. Meddler-in-the-middle attackers can pipeline commands after a POP3 STLS command, injecting plaintext commands into an encrypted user session.
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 confidenceSmarterMail's POP3 server implementation has a vulnerability where an attacker performing a man-in-the-middle attack can pipeline plaintext commands after the STLS command initiates TLS encryption, allowing injection of commands into what should be an encrypted session. This can enable credential theft or session manipulation.
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<= 100.0.7537CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Confirm SmarterMail is installedLocate the SmarterMail installation directory or check running processes for SmarterMail serviceAffected if SmarterMail software is found on the system
-
Check the installed SmarterMail versionAccess the SmarterMail admin interface or check the application version information, then compare it to the affected version 100.0.7537Affected if The installed version is 100.0.7537 or any lower version number
-
Verify POP3 service is enabledCheck SmarterMail service configuration to determine if POP3 server access is enabled for usersAffected if POP3 is enabled and accessible on the server
-
Test POP3 STLS behaviorConnect to the POP3 port and issue the STLS command, then attempt to pipeline plaintext commands after STLS to observe if they are acceptedAffected if Plaintext commands are accepted after STLS initiates TLS negotiation, indicating the vulnerability is present
You are affected if SmarterMail version 100.0.7537 or lower is installed with POP3 service enabled, and the server accepts plaintext commands after STLS begins TLS encryption.
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 dataApply vendor patch when available; until then, disable POP3 access or enforce TLS certificate verification on clients to prevent MITM positioning.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-29548 — 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-2020-29548 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