CVE-2020-7621
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 · uneditedstrong-nginx-controller through 1.0.2 is vulnerable to Command Injection. It allows execution of arbitrary command as part of the '_nginxCmd()' function.
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 confidencestrong-nginx-controller through version 1.0.2 contains a command injection vulnerability in the _nginxCmd() function that allows attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands. This occurs due to unsanitized user input being passed to a system shell execution call.
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<= 1.0.2CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Check installed version of strong-nginx-controllerRun `npm list strong-nginx-controller` or inspect your package.json file for the installed versionAffected if The installed version is 1.0.2 or lower
-
Locate the _nginxCmd function in the codebaseSearch the codebase for the string '_nginxCmd' to identify if this function exists in the deployed applicationAffected if The _nginxCmd function is present in the codebase and is being used
-
Verify if user input reaches the vulnerable functionExamine the code paths that call _nginxCmd to determine if any HTTP request parameters or user-controlled data are passed to this function without sanitizationAffected if User-supplied input (such as query parameters, headers, or body data) is passed directly to the _nginxCmd function without validation
-
Check for shell execution without sanitizationInspect the implementation of _nginxCmd to see if it uses methods that invoke a system shell (such as exec with string arguments, system, or shellexec) with unsanitized inputAffected if The _nginxCmd function executes system commands using unsanitized user input through a shell interpreter
You are affected if you have strong-nginx-controller version 1.0.2 or earlier and your application passes user input to the _nginxCmd function without sanitization, allowing command injection.
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 to a patched version if available. If no patch exists, implement strict input validation and use safer alternatives to shell execution (e.g., exec with array arguments instead of system shell calls) to remediate the injection point in the _nginxCmd() function.
- Consultation2.0 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 $3,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-7621 — 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-2020-7621 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