CVE-2020-37094
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 · uneditedEspoCRM 5.7.0 prior to 5.9.0 contains an authentication token reuse vulnerability that allows authenticated attackers to bypass two-factor authentication by exploiting token-to-password-hash mapping in application/Espo/Core/Utils/Authentication/Espo.php. Attackers can obtain an authentication token for a controlled account and replay it against any victim account sharing the same password, since tokens are bound to password hashes rather than unique per-user values, bypassing the victim's 2FA protections.
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 confidenceEspoCRM versions 5.7.0 through 5.8.x contain an authentication token reuse vulnerability where tokens are bound to password hashes rather than unique per-user values. An authenticated attacker controlling their own account can obtain a token and replay it against any victim account sharing the same password hash, bypassing the victim's two-factor authentication protections.
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<= 5.8.5CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
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.
-
Check installed EspoCRM versionLocate the version file in the EspoCRM installation directory (typically version.php in the application root or metadata directory) or access Admin > About in the web interface to view the running version numberAffected if The version is 5.7.0 through 5.8.5 (any version <= 5.8.5) and not yet upgraded to 5.9.0 or later
-
Verify token binding mechanismAccess the EspoCRM source code and inspect the authentication token generation logic in the API/ authentication module to confirm tokens are bound to password_hash rather than a unique user identifierAffected if Tokens are generated or validated using only the password_hash value without binding to a unique user-specific value
-
Check for duplicate password hashes across user accountsQuery the database user table (typically 'user' table) for duplicate password_hash values: SELECT password_hash, COUNT(*) as cnt FROM user GROUP BY password_hash HAVING cnt > 1Affected if Multiple user accounts share identical password_hash values, which enables token replay across those accounts
-
Inspect token storage and validation logicReview the code handling access_token creation and validation to confirm the token is tied to password_hash rather than a per-user unique identifier like user_id combined with a random saltAffected if The token validation relies solely on matching password_hash without verifying the specific user identity
You are affected if EspoCRM version is 5.8.5 or earlier AND your database contains any user accounts with identical password hashes, which would allow a token issued for one account to be replayed against another account sharing that password hash.
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 · scopedUpgrade to EspoCRM version 5.9.0 or later, which implements per-user token binding instead of password-hash-based token validation.
EspoCRM 5.9.0 or later
- 1. Back up your EspoCRM database and files before upgrading
- 2. Download EspoCRM version 5.9.0 or later from the official website (www.espocrm.com)
- 3. Follow the official EspoCRM upgrade instructions for your installation method
- 4. After upgrade, verify that authentication and 2FA functionality work correctly
- 5. Confirm the fix by checking that authentication tokens are no longer reusable across accounts with the same password hash
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-37094 — 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-2020-37094 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