CVE-2020-4107
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 · uneditedHCL Domino is affected by an Insufficient Access Control vulnerability. An authenticated attacker with local access to the system could exploit this vulnerability to attain escalation of privileges, denial of service, or information disclosure.
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 confidenceHCL Domino contains an insufficient access control vulnerability that allows an authenticated attacker with local system access to potentially escalate privileges to higher permissions, cause denial of service, or obtain unauthorized access to sensitive information. The vulnerability stems from improper enforcement of access control policies within the Domino system.
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= 9.0= 10.0= 11.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 HCL Domino installationCheck for Domino installation by looking for the Domino program directory (typically C:\IBM\Domino or /opt/ibm/domino) and verify the notes.ini configuration file exists in the data directoryAffected if HCL Domino is installed on the system
-
Identify Domino versionRun the command 'tell http version' from the Domino server console, or check the version information in the Domino\license.jar file, or review the version displayed in the Domino Administrator clientAffected if The installed version matches 9.0, 10.0, or 11.0 exactly
-
Verify local system access is enabledCheck the Domino Directory (names.nsf) under Server\Configurations document, specifically review the 'Allow anonymous notes HTTP connections' and local system authentication settings in the Security tabAffected if Local or anonymous access is permitted in the Domino security configuration
-
Inspect access control list settingsOpen the Domino Directory (names.nsf) and examine the Access Control List (ACL) for the default and anonymous entries. Use the Domino Administrator to view ACL settings via Files > names.nsf > ACLAffected if The ACL contains overly permissive entries (such as Manager or Editor access for Default or Anonymous) that bypass proper access control enforcement
A user is affected if HCL Domino version 9.0, 10.0, or 11.0 is installed with local or anonymous access enabled and overly permissive ACL settings that fail to enforce proper access control policies.
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 HCL Domino security patch for CVE-2020-4107 and review user access permissions to ensure least-privilege principles are enforced. Additionally, limit local access to trusted administrators and monitor for suspicious local authentication activity.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-4107 — 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-2020-4107 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