Sys InfoApplication · Sys Info Project
CVE-2020-36434
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 was discovered in the sys-info crate before 0.8.0 for Rust. sys_info::disk_info calls can trigger a double free.
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 double-free vulnerability exists in the sys-info Rust crate versions before 0.8.0. The disk_info function contains a memory management flaw where memory is freed twice, leading to undefined behavior and potential code execution. This is a memory corruption issue in a low-level system information library.
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
Sys InfoApplication
< 0.8.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 sys-info crate dependencySearch your project files (Cargo.toml) for 'sys-info' in the [dependencies] section and note the version number specifiedAffected if The version specified is less than 0.8.0 or no version is pinned (allowing any vulnerable version)
-
Check locked dependency versionExamine your Cargo.lock file for the [[package]] entry named 'sys-info' and locate the 'version' field to see the resolved versionAffected if The locked version is less than 0.8.0 (e.g., 0.7.0, 0.6.x, etc.)
-
Identify disk_info usageSearch your source code for calls to the disk_info function (e.g., grep for 'disk_info(' or 'sys_info::disk_info')Affected if Your code explicitly calls the disk_info function from the sys-info crate
-
Check for transitive dependencyRun 'cargo tree -p sys-info' or 'cargo tree -i sys-info' to see if sys-info is pulled in as a transitive dependency, and note which versionAffected if sys-info appears in the dependency tree at a version below 0.8.0 regardless of whether your direct code calls disk_info
You are affected if your project uses sys-info crate at any version below 0.8.0, regardless of whether disk_info is directly called, since the vulnerable library is loaded into your binary.
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.
dbcve · scoped0.8.0
Upgrade the sys-info crate to version 0.8.0 or later in Cargo.toml to obtain the patched version that fixes the double-free in disk_info.
sys-info crate version 0.8.0
- Update the sys-info crate dependency in Cargo.toml to version 0.8.0 or later
- Run cargo update to fetch the new version
- Run cargo build to rebuild with the fixed version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Sys Info
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-36434 — 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-2020-36434 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