CVE-2020-37123
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 · uneditedPinger 1.0 contains a remote code execution vulnerability that allows attackers to inject shell commands through the ping and socket parameters. Attackers can exploit the unsanitized input in ping.php to write arbitrary PHP files and execute system commands by appending shell metacharacters.
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 confidenceThis is a command injection vulnerability in Pinger 1.0's ping.php where the ping and socket parameters accept unsanitized user input. Attackers can inject shell metacharacters to append commands, write arbitrary PHP files to the server, and achieve remote 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.
-
Locate Pinger installation and versionSearch the web server document root for the Pinger application directory and check for version information in files such as version.php, about.php, or any README/install files.Affected if Pinger version 1.0 is present on the system
-
Find ping.php in the installationLocate the ping.php file within the Pinger application directory structure, typically in the main application folder or a /src/ subdirectory.Affected if The ping.php file exists in the Pinger installation
-
Check if ping.php is exposed without authenticationAttempt to access the ping.php endpoint via HTTP request without providing credentials or session cookies to determine if it is publicly accessible.Affected if ping.php responds to unauthenticated requests
-
Verify parameter handling lacks sanitizationExamine the source code of ping.php and identify if the 'ping' and 'socket' parameters are used in functions like exec(), shell_exec(), system(), or passthru() without being passed through escapeshellarg() or similar sanitization.Affected if The code directly incorporates ping/socket parameters into shell commands without input validation
-
Check for file write capability exposureReview ping.php to determine if the parameters allow writing PHP content to disk, such as through file_put_contents() or fwrite() with user-controlled input.Affected if User-supplied input from ping or socket parameters can be written to files on the server
The environment is affected if Pinger 1.0 is installed, ping.php is accessible without authentication, and the ping/socket parameters are not sanitized before being used in shell execution or file operations.
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 validation and sanitization on ping and socket parameters using functions like escapeshellarg(), or refactor to avoid shell execution entirely. Remove any ability to write files via these parameters.
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-37123 — 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-2020-37123 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