CVE-2020-4882
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 · uneditedIBM Planning Analytics 2.0 could be vulnerable to a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) attack by constucting URLs from user-controlled data . This could enable attackers to make arbitrary requests to the internal network or to the local file system. IBM X-Force ID: 190852.
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 confidenceIBM Planning Analytics 2.0 contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability where the application constructs URLs using user-controlled input without proper validation. This allows attackers to make the server perform requests to internal network resources or access the local file system, potentially exposing sensitive internal services or data.
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= 2.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Confirm IBM Planning Analytics versionCheck the installed version of IBM Planning Analytics in your environment. This can typically be found in the product's about section, installation directory, or by querying the TM1 Administration Server. Compare your installed version against 2.0.Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.0
-
Identify web-facing URL input interfacesReview your IBM Planning Analytics deployment for any web interfaces, REST API endpoints, or administration consoles that accept URL parameters. This includes TM1 Web, REST APIs, and any custom integrations that process user-supplied URL data.Affected if Any endpoint accepts user-controlled URL parameters without validation
-
Check for unauthenticated or low-privilege URL endpointsEnumerate publicly accessible endpoints in your IBM Planning Analytics installation. Look for parameters in HTTP requests that could be used to construct or influence URLs, such as redirect parameters, feed URLs, or external resource references.Affected if Unauthenticated or low-privilege users can submit URL values to application endpoints
-
Test internal network accessibilityIf URL input endpoints exist, verify whether the application permits connections to internal network addresses (127.0.0.1, 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x) or local file system paths (file:// protocol).Affected if The application allows URL-based connections to internal resources or local file system through user input
You are affected if your IBM Planning Analytics installation is version 2.0 AND exposes any endpoint that accepts user-supplied URL parameters without proper validation.
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 allow-list controls for any user-supplied data used in URL construction. Restrict URL schemes to only necessary protocols and consider disabling access to internal IP ranges and local file system paths.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-4882 — 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-2020-4882 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