CVE-2020-37120
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 · uneditedRubo DICOM Viewer 2.0 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in the DICOM server name input field that allows attackers to overwrite Structured Exception Handler (SEH). Attackers can craft a malicious text file with carefully constructed payload to execute arbitrary code by overwriting SEH and triggering remote code execution.
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 confidenceRubo DICOM Viewer 2.0 contains a stack-based buffer overflow in the DICOM server name input processing. When a user loads a malicious text file containing an overly long server name string, the overflow overwrites the Structured Exception Handler (SEH) record, allowing attackers to divert execution flow and achieve arbitrary code execution.
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.
-
Identify Rubo DICOM Viewer installationSearch for Rubo DICOM Viewer in installed programs (Windows: Registry key HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall, or check Program Files directory for executable named 'RuboDicomViewer.exe' or similar)Affected if Rubo DICOM Viewer version 2.0 is installed on the system
-
Confirm installed version numberRight-click the executable, select Properties, then check the Details tab for File Version; or run the application and look in Help > AboutAffected if The installed version is exactly 2.0 or falls within the 2.0.x release line
-
Check for DICOM server configurationLook for configuration files in the application data folder (commonly %APPDATA%\RuboDicomViewer\ or similar) for any stored server name entries; examine any .ini or .cfg filesAffected if The application has stored DICOM server name configurations or has been used to connect to DICOM servers
-
Inspect application logs for crash evidenceCheck application log files (often in %LOCALAPPDATA%\RuboDICOM Viewer\Logs or similar) for stack overflow or SEH overwrite error messagesAffected if Logs contain error messages mentioning buffer overflow, stack corruption, or SEH record corruption related to server name processing
A user is affected if Rubo DICOM Viewer version 2.0 is installed and the DICOM server name feature has been used, as the buffer overflow only triggers when loading a malicious text file with an oversized server name string.
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 strict input length validation and bounds checking on the server name field before copying to fixed-size buffers; replace unsafe string functions with bounded alternatives (e.g., strncpy, snprintf).
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-37120 — 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-2020-37120 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