CVE-2020-7220
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 · uneditedHashiCorp Vault Enterprise 0.11.0 through 1.3.1 fails, in certain circumstances, to revoke dynamic secrets for a mount in a deleted namespace. Fixed in 1.3.2.
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 confidenceHashiCorp Vault Enterprise versions 0.11.0 through 1.3.1 fail to revoke dynamic secrets (e.g., database credentials, cloud provider keys) when a mount point exists within a deleted namespace. This leaves issued credentials valid and usable even after the namespace containing the secret engine mount has been removed, creating a credential lifecycle management gap.
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>= 0.11.0, < 1.3.2CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Identify Vault version and editionRun `vault version` or query the `/sys/version` API endpoint to confirm you are running Vault Enterprise (not open-source) and note the exact version number.Affected if Version is 0.11.0 through 1.3.1 and the edition is Enterprise.
-
Review existing namespacesRun `vault namespace list` to list all current namespaces in the environment. Compare against any documentation or audit logs of previously created namespaces to identify any that may have been deleted.Affected if Any namespace was previously created and then deleted, particularly if it contained secret engine mounts.
-
Audit secret engine mountsRun `vault secrets list -namespace=` for each namespace to catalog all secret engine mounts. Check audit logs (if available) for any mount entries associated with now-deleted namespaces.Affected if Secret engine mounts existed in namespaces that have since been deleted.
-
Inspect dynamic credentialsQuery the lease database or audit logs for any outstanding leases associated with secret engines from deleted namespace mount points. Use `vault list sys/leases/lookup` or review lease audit entries.Affected if There are active leases for dynamic secrets (database credentials, cloud provider keys, etc.) issued by mounts that were in deleted namespaces.
You are affected if running Vault Enterprise versions 0.11.0 through 1.3.1 and you have ever deleted a namespace that contained secret engine mounts, as any dynamic credentials issued by those mounts may still be valid.
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 data1.3.2
Upgrade Vault Enterprise to version 1.3.2 or later. Prior to upgrade, audit existing namespaces and mounts to identify any that were previously deleted to manually revoke any potentially orphaned dynamic credentials.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $4,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-7220 — 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-2020-7220 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