Nginx ControllerWeb server / proxy · F5
CVE-2020-5900
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 · uneditedIn versions 3.0.0-3.4.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, there is insufficient cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protections for the NGINX Controller user interface.
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 confidenceNGINX Controller versions 3.0.0-3.4.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1 contain insufficient cross-site request forgery (CSRF) protections in their user interface. Attackers could exploit this to perform unauthorized actions on behalf of authenticated users by tricking them into visiting malicious pages or clicking crafted links.
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
Nginx ControllerWeb server / proxy
>= 2.0.0, <= 2.9.0>= 3.0.0, <= 3.4.0= 1.0.1CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 NGINX Controller installationCheck for running NGINX Controller processes (e.g., 'ps aux | grep controller' or check for container named 'nginx-controller' or similar)Affected if NGINX Controller is not running in the environment
-
Determine installed NGINX Controller versionQuery the API or UI for version info (e.g., GET /api/v1/system/about or check package/binary version), or check installed RPM/deb package versionAffected if Version cannot be determined or differs from what the vendor documents for the installed instance
-
Compare version against affected rangesMatch the identified version against: 1.0.1, 2.0.0-2.9.0, or 3.0.0-3.4.0Affected if The installed version falls within any of the affected ranges (1.0.1, 2.0.0-2.9.0, 3.0.0-3.4.0)
-
Check web UI accessibilityVerify if the NGINX Controller web interface is exposed to network (check listening ports, reverse proxy configs, firewall rules)Affected if The UI is accessible from untrusted networks
The environment is affected if NGINX Controller versions 1.0.1, 2.0.0-2.9.0, or 3.0.0-3.4.0 are running and the web UI is 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.
From vendor dataUpdate NGINX Controller to a patched version that implements proper CSRF token validation and SameSite cookie attributes, or implement anti-CSRF tokens on all state-changing UI operations.
Fix this in Nginx Controller
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-5900 — 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-2020-5900 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