CVE-2020-3272
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 DHCP server of Cisco Prime Network Registrar could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to cause a denial of service (DoS) condition on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation of incoming DHCP traffic. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted DHCP request to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause a restart of the DHCP server process, causing a DoS condition.
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 confidenceA vulnerability in the DHCP server of Cisco Prime Network Registrar allows unauthenticated remote attackers to cause denial of service by sending crafted DHCP requests. The issue stems from insufficient input validation of incoming DHCP traffic, which triggers a restart of the DHCP server process when exploited.
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>= 8.3, < 8.3.7.1>= 9.0, < 9.1.3>= 10.0, < 10.1.0.1CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 Cisco Prime Network Registrar installationLocate the software on the system using system inventory tools, package managers, or by checking for 'Cisco Prime Network Registrar' in installed programs or servicesAffected if The software is present on the system
-
Identify the installed versionCheck the version of Cisco Prime Network Registrar using the vendor's command-line interface, registry entries, or installation documentation for your systemAffected if The version falls within any of these ranges: 8.3 through 8.3.7.0, 9.0 through 9.1.2, or 10.0 through 10.1.0.0
-
Verify DHCP server is enabledCheck if the DHCP server component or service for Cisco Prime Network Registrar is running or enabled on the systemAffected if The DHCP server service or process is active and listening for DHCP requests
-
Assess network exposure of DHCP serviceReview firewall rules, network ACLs, or port bindings to determine if UDP ports 67/68 (DHCP) are exposed to untrusted or external networksAffected if DHCP traffic is not restricted to trusted internal sources and is reachable from untrusted networks
You are affected if Cisco Prime Network Registrar is installed with a version in the ranges 8.3 to 8.3.7.0, 9.0 to 9.1.2, or 10.0 to 10.1.0.0, and the DHCP server feature is enabled and accessible from untrusted networks.
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 data8.3.7.19.1.310.1.0.1
Apply the vendor patch from Cisco when available. As an interim measure, restrict DHCP traffic to trusted sources using network ACLs or place the affected system behind a firewall to limit exposure to untrusted DHCP requests.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-3272 — 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-2020-3272 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