CVE-2020-35557
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 in MB connect line mymbCONNECT24, mbCONNECT24 and Helmholz myREX24 and myREX24.virtual in all versions through v2.11.2 allows a logged in user to see devices in the account he should not have access to due to improper use of access validation.
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 confidenceImproper access validation in mbCONNECT24 and myREX24 products allows authenticated users to view devices in accounts they should not have access to, representing a broken access control vulnerability (CWE-639) where authorization checks are not properly enforced on device visibility.
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<= 2.11.2<= 2.11.2<= 2.11.2<= 2.11.2CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 installed product versionLocate the version information in the web interface (typically under Help > About or Settings > System Info) or check the installation package version. For command-line environments, check the application banner or version flag if available.Affected if The installed version is mbCONNECT24, myREX24, or myREX24.virtual at version 2.11.2 or lower.
-
Confirm user authentication is enabledVerify that user authentication is active on the mbCONNECT24/myREX24 instance. Check if the login page is accessible and functional.Affected if Authentication is enabled and users can log in to the system.
-
Audit existing user accountsReview the user management section to list all user accounts configured in the system. Identify if multiple user accounts exist with different access levels.Affected if Two or more user accounts exist with assigned device access privileges.
-
Review user-role-device mappingsAccess the admin or user management panel and examine the device assignments for each user account. Check if devices are mapped to specific users or roles.Affected if Users have explicitly assigned devices or roles that determine which devices they can view.
-
Test cross-account device visibilityLog in as a standard user with limited access and attempt to browse or access devices outside their assigned scope. Compare the visible device list against what that user should legitimately see based on their role assignments.Affected if A user can view devices that are not assigned to their account or role, indicating broken access control.
You are affected if the installed version is mbCONNECT24, myREX24, or myREX24.virtual at version 2.11.2 or lower AND multiple users with different access levels exist 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 dataUpdate to version v2.12.0 or later which contains the proper access validation fix. Review user-role-device mappings to ensure no unauthorized access occurred.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-35557 — 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-2020-35557 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