CVE-2020-7503
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 · uneditedA CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in Easergy T300 (Firmware version 1.5.2 and older) which could allow an attacker to execute malicious commands on behalf of a legitimate user when xsrf-token data is intercepted.
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 CWE-352 (Cross-Site Request Forgery) vulnerability exists in Schneider Electric's Easergy T300 firmware version 1.5.2 and older. The vulnerability allows attackers to execute malicious commands on behalf of legitimate users by intercepting the xsrf-token data used for CSRF protection.
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<= 1.5.2CVSS 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
- 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 Easergy T300 firmware versionAccess the device's web management interface or CLI and navigate to the firmware/version information section. Look for a field displaying the current firmware version number.Affected if The displayed firmware version is 1.5.2 or lower.
-
Confirm web interface is enabledVerify that the Easergy T300 web management interface is accessible on the network by attempting to reach the device's IP address via HTTP/HTTPS in a web browser.Affected if The web interface is accessible and the device is running a vulnerable firmware version.
-
Inspect CSRF token handlingLog into the web interface and examine HTTP requests (via browser dev tools or a proxy) to observe the xsrf-token parameter. Check if the token remains static across sessions or appears to be easily predictable/reusable.Affected if The xsrf-token is absent, static, or not validated per-request, and the firmware version is 1.5.2 or lower.
-
Review anti-CSRF implementationExamine the authentication and session management configuration within the web interface settings to determine if proper anti-CSRF mechanisms are implemented.Affected if No robust anti-CSRF token validation is configured and the firmware version is 1.5.2 or lower.
A user is affected if the Easergy T300 device is running firmware version 1.5.2 or lower and has its web interface accessible without proper per-request CSRF token 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 dataUpgrade Easergy T300 firmware to a version newer than 1.5.2, which should include proper CSRF token validation. Alternatively, implement robust anti-CSRF tokens that cannot be easily intercepted.
- Consultation4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-7503 — 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-2020-7503 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