CVE-2020-5633
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 · uneditedMultiple NEC products (Express5800/T110j, Express5800/T110j-S, Express5800/T110j (2nd-Gen), Express5800/T110j-S (2nd-Gen), iStorage NS100Ti, and Express5800/GT110j) where Baseboard Management Controller (BMC) firmware Rev1.09 and earlier is applied allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and then obtain/modify BMC setting information, obtain monitoring information, or reboot/shut down the vulnerable product via unspecified vectors.
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 confidenceA critical authentication bypass vulnerability in the Baseboard Management Controller (BMC) firmware Rev1.09 and earlier on NEC Express5800 servers and iStorage NS100Ti allows remote unauthenticated attackers to gain full BMC control, enabling them to view/modify configuration settings, access monitoring data, and perform power operations (reboot/shutdown).
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<= 1.09CVSS 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 the server modelCheck if the system is a NEC Express5800 server or iStorage NS100Ti by examining the server chassis label, BIOS boot screen, or system inventory documentationAffected if The system is a NEC Express5800 or iStorage NS100Ti model
-
Check BMC firmware versionAccess the BMC web interface via IPMI/Redfish or use IPMI commands (ipmitool -I lanplus -H <BMC_IP> -U ADMIN -P ADMIN mc info) to retrieve the firmware revision. Alternatively, check via BMC web UI under 'Maintenance' or 'Firmware Information' sectionAffected if The BMC firmware version is Rev1.09 or earlier
-
Verify BMC network accessibilityConfirm the BMC IP address is reachable on the network by pinging the BMC IP or scanning for open ports 443 (HTTPS) or 623 (IPMI)Affected if The BMC is directly accessible from untrusted networks without network segmentation
-
Check BMC interface statusAttempt to access the BMC login page or use IPMI command (ipmitool -I lanplus -H <BMC_IP> chassis status) without valid credentials to verify if authentication is being enforcedAffected if BMC interface responds without requiring authentication or accepts default credentials
A user is affected if they run a NEC Express5800 or NS100Ti server with BMC firmware Rev1.09 or earlier that is network-accessible.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade BMC firmware to a version newer than Rev1.09 (contact NEC for patched firmware). If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict network access to the BMC interface (IPMI/Redfish) via network segmentation or firewall rules to limit exposure.
BMC firmware Rev1.10 or later (specific version varies by product model)
- 1. Identify the specific NEC product model (Express5800/T110j, Express5800/T110j-S, Express5800/T110j (2nd-Gen), Express5800/T110j-S (2nd-Gen), iStorage NS100Ti, or Express5800/GT110j) from the affected list.
- 2. Access the BMC web interface or IPMI interface of the affected server.
- 3. Navigate to the firmware update or BMC maintenance section.
- 4. Download the BMC firmware update from the official NEC support website (support.nec.co.jp) for your specific product model.
- 5. Apply the BMC firmware update, ensuring stable power throughout the update process.
- 6. After the update completes, verify the BMC firmware version has been updated beyond Rev1.09.
- 7. Confirm the authentication vulnerability is remediated by verifying that BMC authentication is now properly enforced.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-5633 — 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-2020-5633 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