CVE-2020-35742
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 · uneditedHGiga MailSherlock contains a vulnerability of SQL Injection. Attackers can inject and launch SQL commands in a URL parameter.
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 · moderate confidenceHGiga MailSherlock is vulnerable to SQL injection via a URL parameter. Attackers can inject arbitrary SQL commands through the vulnerable parameter, potentially allowing unauthorized access to, modification of, or deletion of database contents. The high CVSS score indicates significant potential impact on confidentiality and integrity.
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< 4.5-133< 4.5-120< 4.5-133< 4.5-120CVSS 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
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L
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 if HGiga MailSherlock is installedCheck system installed programs, services, or running processes for 'MailSherlock', 'Msr45', 'Ssr45', or 'HGiga' using commands like 'sc query', 'tasklist', or inspecting Program Files directories.Affected if HGiga MailSherlock software is found on the system
-
Determine the installed versionLocate the version information for the MailSherlock installation. Check installation directories, registry keys (HKLM\Software\HGiga or similar), or the web interface banner/version page if accessible.Affected if The version number is lower than 4.5-133 for Antispam variants or lower than 4.5-120 for User variants
-
Confirm the web interface is exposedCheck if the MailSherlock web service is listening on HTTP/HTTPS ports (commonly ports 80, 443, or custom ports). Use 'netstat -an' or 'nmap' to identify exposed web services.Affected if The web interface is accessible over the network (the SQL injection occurs via URL parameter)
-
Check for signs of exploitationReview MailSherlock server logs, web server access logs, and database logs for suspicious SQL syntax in URL parameters, unexpected database queries, or unfamiliar administrative actions.Affected if Log analysis reveals SQL injection attempts or unauthorized database access patterns
A user is affected if HGiga MailSherlock (Msr45 or Ssr45) is installed with a version lower than 4.5-133 (Antispam) or 4.5-120 (User) and the web interface is network-accessible.
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 data4.5-1204.5-133
Implement parameterized queries (prepared statements) for all database interactions. Additionally, apply input validation and proper output encoding on user-supplied data in URL parameters. Apply any vendor patches if available.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-35742 — 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-2020-35742 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