CVE-2020-36941
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 · uneditedKnockpy 4.1.1 contains a CSV injection vulnerability that allows attackers to inject malicious formulas into CSV reports through unfiltered server headers. Attackers can manipulate server response headers to include spreadsheet formulas that will execute when the CSV is opened in spreadsheet applications.
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 confidenceKnockpy 4.1.1 is vulnerable to CSV injection (formula injection) because server response headers are written to CSV reports without sanitization. Attackers can manipulate HTTP response headers to contain spreadsheet formulas (e.g., formulas starting with =, +, -, @) that execute arbitrary commands when the victim opens the CSV in spreadsheet software like Excel or LibreOffice Calc.
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= 4.1.1CVSS 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 Knockpy installation and versionRun 'pip show knockpy' or check the installed package version using pip, or look for knockpy in your Python packages directoryAffected if The installed version is Knockpy 4.1.1
-
Locate CSV report output directorySearch for CSV files generated by knockpy, typically in output folders or the current working directory where knockpy was runAffected if CSV reports exist and were generated by knockpy version 4.1.1
-
Inspect CSV report headers for server header dataOpen any knockpy-generated CSV files and examine columns for server response header values (e.g., Server, X-Powered-By, custom headers)Affected if CSV files contain raw server header values without sanitization of formula characters (=, @, +, -, tab)
-
Check for formula-like characters in header columnsUse a text editor or 'grep' to search CSV content for lines starting with =, @, +, - or containing these characters at the start of header-related fieldsAffected if Server header fields in CSV start with =, @, +, - or contain these as leading characters which would execute when opened in spreadsheet software
You are affected if Knockpy version 4.1.1 is installed and has generated CSV reports containing unfiltered server header values that could contain spreadsheet formula injection characters.
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 dataImplement input validation and output encoding to sanitize all server header values before写入 CSV reports, stripping or escaping characters that could be interpreted as spreadsheet formulas (particularly characters like =, +, -, @, and tab).
- Consultation1.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-36941 — 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-2020-36941 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