CVE-2020-6200
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 · uneditedThe SAP Commerce (SmartEdit Extension), versions- 6.6, 6.7, 1808, 1811, is vulnerable to client-side angularjs template injection, a variant of Cross-Site-Scripting (XSS) that exploits the templating facilities of the angular framework.
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 confidenceSAP Commerce SmartEdit Extension versions 6.6, 6.7, 1808, and 1811 contain a client-side AngularJS template injection vulnerability, which is a variant of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) that exploits AngularJS's templating facilities to inject malicious templates.
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= 6.6= 6.7= 1808= 1811CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Verify SmartEdit extension is deployedCheck your SAP Commerce installation for the presence of the SmartEdit module/extension in the configuration files (e.g., localextensions.xml or extensioninfo.xml) or by accessing the SmartEdit application endpoint (typically /smartedit).Affected if SmartEdit extension is listed in your extensions configuration or responds on the SmartEdit URL path
-
Confirm SAP Commerce versionLocate the version file or startup logs that report the SAP Commerce platform version. This is often found in the installer, system information page, or the version.properties file in the hybris bin directory.Affected if The installed version is exactly 6.6, 6.7, 1808, or 1811
-
Identify if SmartEdit web module is accessibleAttempt to access the SmartEdit web application endpoint (e.g., /smartedit/index.html or /smartedit-web/app.html) from the storefront or admin gateway.Affected if The SmartEdit interface loads and accepts user input in AngularJS-based fields
-
Check for template injection points in SmartEditInspect network traffic when using SmartEdit features that accept custom text input (such as CMS component editing, slot management, or content slot configuration). Look for request parameters that may be reflected in AngularJS template contexts.Affected if User-provided content in SmartEdit is rendered without sanitization or AngularJS $sce context restrictions
You are affected if your SAP Commerce version is exactly 6.6, 6.7, 1808, or 1811 AND the SmartEdit extension is enabled and accessible, as this combination enables the AngularJS template injection vector.
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 vendor patches from SAP for this vulnerability and implement proper input sanitization or use AngularJS's $sce service to restrict template execution.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-6200 — 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-2020-6200 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