Secure Firewall Management CenterApplication · Cisco
CVE-2020-3320
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 web-based management interface of Cisco Firepower Management Center could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the web-based management interface of an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input by the web-based management interface of an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by first entering input within the web-based management interface and then persuading a user of the interface to view the crafted input within the interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary script code in the context of the affected interface or access sensitive, browser-based information.
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 stored XSS vulnerability in Cisco Firepower Management Center's web-based management interface allows an authenticated attacker to inject malicious scripts through insufficiently validated user input. When other users view the crafted content, the script executes in their browser context, enabling potential session hijacking or data theft.
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
Secure Firewall Management CenterApplication
<= 6.6.1
Sourcefire Defense CenterApplication
= 6.4.0= 6.4.0.6= 6.5.0= 6.6.0CVSS 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
- 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 product versionAccess the web-based management interface and navigate to the Help > About page, or use the CLI command 'show version' to determine if the system is running Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center or Cisco Sourcefire Defense Center and note the exact version number.Affected if The installed version is Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center <= 6.6.1 OR Cisco Sourcefire Defense Center = 6.4.0, 6.4.0.6, 6.5.0, or 6.6.0.
-
Confirm web management interface is accessibleVerify that the web-based management interface (HTTPS on port 443 or configured port) is exposed and reachable. Check firewall rules or network access lists to determine if the interface accepts connections.Affected if The web management interface is accessible from any network location beyond trusted administrative personnel.
-
Review user-created objects for suspicious contentInspect user-created objects such as access control policies, network objects, host profiles, or custom signatures through the management interface for unexpected script tags, JavaScript code, or HTML attributes in text fields.Affected if Any user-created object contains script tags or JavaScript code embedded in input fields that could execute in another user's browser.
-
Audit administrative user accountsReview the list of administrative users and recent login activity in the management interface under System > Users or similar administrative sections to identify any unauthorized accounts or suspicious session activity.Affected if Unexpected administrative accounts exist or unusual administrative activity is observed.
A user is affected if their Cisco Firepower Management Center or Sourcefire Defense Center runs a version within the affected ranges AND the web management interface is accessible to users who could inject malicious scripts.
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 for this vulnerability. Restrict access to the web management interface to trusted personnel only until the patch can be deployed.
Fix this in Secure Firewall Management Center
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-3320 — 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-2020-3320 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