CVE-2020-4095
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 · unedited"BigFix Platform is storing clear text credentials within the system's memory. An attacker who is able to gain administrative privileges can use a program to create a memory dump and extract the credentials. These credentials can be used to pivot further into the environment. The principle of least privilege should be applied to all BigFix deployments, limiting administrative access."
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 · moderate confidenceThe BigFix Platform stores credentials in cleartext within system memory. An attacker with administrative privileges can create a memory dump and extract these plaintext credentials, potentially enabling lateral movement within the environment.
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>= 9.2, <= 9.2.19>= 9.5, <= 9.5.15CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Verify BigFix Platform installationCheck for BigFix installation by searching for the BigFix directory (typically under C:\Program Files\BigFix or /opt/BigFix) or by querying for the BigFix service using 'sc query' on Windows or 'ls /opt/BigFix' on LinuxAffected if BigFix Platform is not installed on the system
-
Identify installed BigFix versionOn Windows, check the version by inspecting the BESClient.exe or BESServer.exe file properties in the installation directory, or run 'BESServer.exe -version' if available. On Linux, check /opt/BigFix/BESServer/bin/BESServer -versionAffected if The version cannot be determined or the BigFix server/client binaries are not found
-
Compare version against affected rangesCompare your installed version number to the vulnerable ranges: 9.2.x versions from 9.2 through 9.2.19, and 9.5.x versions from 9.5 through 9.5.15 are affectedAffected if The installed version falls within 9.2.0 through 9.2.19 or 9.5.0 through 9.5.15
-
Confirm BigFix services are runningVerify the BigFix services are active by checking running processes (BESClient, BESServer) or service status using 'sc query BESClient' on Windows or 'systemctl status besserver' on LinuxAffected if The BigFix Platform services are currently running and operational
The system is affected if Hcltech BigFix Platform version 9.2.0 through 9.2.19 or 9.5.0 through 9.5.15 is installed with active services, and an attacker with administrative privileges could perform memory dumps to extract plaintext credentials.
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 dataApply the principle of least privilege to limit administrative access to BigFix deployments; consider implementing memory protection mechanisms and ensuring proper access controls are in place.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,680.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-4095 — 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-2020-4095 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