CVE-2020-37012
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 · uneditedTea LaTex 1.0 contains a remote code execution vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary shell commands through the /api.php endpoint. Attackers can craft a malicious LaTeX payload with shell commands that are executed when processed by the application's tex2png API action.
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 confidenceTea LaTex 1.0 has a critical remote code execution vulnerability in the /api.php endpoint's tex2png action. Unauthenticated attackers can inject arbitrary shell commands through malicious LaTeX payloads that get executed during processing, likely due to improper sanitization of user input before passing it to system shell commands.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Tea LaTex installation and versionLocate the Tea LaTex application files, typically in the web server document root. Look for a version file, README, or the main index.php/api.php to identify the installed version as 1.0Affected if Tea LaTex version 1.0 is confirmed installed
-
Verify the /api.php endpoint existsCheck for the presence of api.php in the web application's root directory. Confirm the file is accessible via HTTP/HTTPS requests to the serverAffected if The file api.php exists and is web-accessible
-
Check if tex2png action is enabled and accessibleSend a request to /api.php?action=tex2png (or POST to /api.php with action=tex2png) without authentication credentials and observe if the endpoint respondsAffected if The tex2png action responds without requiring authentication
-
Confirm lack of input sanitization on LaTeX processingInspect the api.php source code, specifically the tex2png action handler, to verify that user-supplied LaTeX input is passed directly to shell execution functions (such as exec, shell_exec, system, passthru) without sanitization or escapingAffected if The code shows LaTeX input is passed unsanitized to shell execution functions
-
Test for command injection vulnerabilitySend a crafted LaTeX payload containing shell metacharacters (for example, \input{/etc/passwd} or command substitution syntax) to the tex2png endpoint and observe if command execution occurs or if the application returns unexpected system informationAffected if Shell commands are executed or system files are accessible through LaTeX injection
A user is affected if Tea LaTex 1.0 is installed with the /api.php endpoint accessible and the tex2png action enabled, as this allows unauthenticated command injection via unsanitized LaTeX input.
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 dataImmediately restrict or disable the vulnerable tex2png API action, implement strict input validation/sanitization for LaTeX commands, and consider sandboxing LaTeX processing in an isolated environment to prevent command injection.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-37012 — 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-2020-37012 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