CVE-2020-35801
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 · uneditedCertain NETGEAR devices are affected by incorrect configuration of security settings. This affects JGS516PE before 2.6.0.48, JGS524Ev2 before 2.6.0.48, JGS524PE before 2.6.0.48, and GS116Ev2 before 2.6.0.48. A TFTP server was found to be active by default. It allows remote authenticated users to update the switch firmware.
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 TFTP server is enabled by default on affected NETGEAR switch models (JGS516PE, JGS524Ev2, JGS524PE, GS116Ev2) prior to firmware version 2.6.0.48. This incorrect security configuration allows remote authenticated users to update the switch firmware via TFTP, potentially leading to firmware manipulation or device compromise.
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< 2.6.0.48< 2.6.0.48< 2.6.0.48< 2.6.0.48CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Identify the switch modelAccess the switch web management interface or use SNMP/LLDP to determine the exact model number (JGS516PE, JGS524Ev2, JGS524PE, or GS116Ev2)Affected if The model is one of JGS516PE, JGS524Ev2, JGS524PE, or GS116Ev2
-
Check the installed firmware versionNavigate to the switch administration panel, typically under 'Maintenance' or 'Firmware' section, and record the current firmware version numberAffected if The firmware version is lower than 2.6.0.48
-
Verify if TFTP server is enabledAccess the switch management interface and locate the TFTP server settings, usually found under 'Advanced' or 'Management' settings, and confirm whether the TFTP service is turned onAffected if TFTP server is enabled (this is the default vulnerable configuration on affected models)
You are affected if your switch is one of the four models (JGS516PE, JGS524Ev2, JGS524PE, GS116Ev2) running firmware below version 2.6.0.48 AND the TFTP server remains enabled (which is the default state).
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 data2.6.0.48
Update the firmware on affected devices to version 2.6.0.48 or later, or disable the TFTP server if not required for operations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-35801 — 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-2020-35801 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