CVE-2020-3138
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in the upgrade component of Cisco Enterprise NFV Infrastructure Software (NFVIS) could allow an authenticated, local attacker to install a malicious file when upgrading. The vulnerability is due to insufficient signature validation. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by providing a crafted upgrade file. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to upload crafted code to the affected device.
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 vulnerability exists in the upgrade component of Cisco Enterprise NFV Infrastructure Software (NFVIS) where insufficient signature validation allows an authenticated, local attacker to install malicious files during the upgrade process. By providing a crafted upgrade file, the attacker can upload arbitrary code to the affected device, achieving code execution with the privileges of the upgrade component.
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<= 3.11.1CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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.
-
Determine NFVIS installed versionRun 'show version' or access the NFVIS admin CLI and check the software version displayedAffected if The displayed version is 3.11.1 or lower (any version <= 3.11.1)
-
Confirm local authentication is enabledCheck if local user accounts exist on the system via 'show running-config | include username' or review authentication settings in the admin UI under Users/AAAAffected if Local authentication is configured and accessible, providing an attacker a path to obtain valid credentials
-
Verify upgrade functionality is accessibleReview the upgrade menu in NFVIS admin UI or check for 'upgrade' commands in the CLI; confirm the upgrade feature is not explicitly disabledAffected if The upgrade component is present and enabled on the system (this is the vulnerable component)
-
Review recent upgrade activity logsAccess upgrade logs via 'show upgrade log' or check /var/log/upgrade* files for any recent upgrade operationsAffected if There are recent upgrade attempts from unexpected sources or at unusual times, or logs show signature validation failures that were overridden
A system is affected if it runs Cisco NFVIS version 3.11.1 or lower AND has the upgrade component accessible with local authentication enabled.
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 the vendor patch from Cisco when available, and ensure local authentication mechanisms are properly secured to limit exposure to authenticated local attackers.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-3138 — 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-2020-3138 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