CVE-2021-20049
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 vulnerability in SonicWall SMA100 password change API allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to perform SMA100 username enumeration based on the server responses. This vulnerability impacts 10.2.1.2-24sv, 10.2.0.8-37sv and earlier 10.x versions.
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 confidenceThe vulnerability exists in the SonicWall SMA100 series SSL VPN password change API. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send specially crafted requests to the API endpoint and observe differential server responses to enumerate valid usernames. This username enumeration can then be used as a stepping stone for brute-force attacks or credential stuffing against the VPN portal.
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< 10.0.0.0= 10.2.0.8-37sv= 10.2.1.2-24sv< 10.0.0.0= 10.2.0.8-37sv= 10.2.1.2-24sv< 10.0.0.0= 10.2.0.8-37sv= 10.2.1.2-24sv< 10.0.0.0= 10.2.0.8-37sv= 10.2.1.2-24sv< 10.0.0.0= 10.2.0.8-37sv= 10.2.1.2-24sv< 10.0.0.0= 10.2.0.8-37sv= 10.2.1.2-24svCVSS 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 the SMA device firmware versionAccess the SMA web interface under 'System Administration > Firmware' or use the command 'show version' via SSH console to retrieve the currently running firmware versionAffected if The installed version is < 10.0.0.0, or exactly 10.2.0.8-37sv, or exactly 10.2.1.2-24sv
-
Confirm the password change API endpoint is accessibleAttempt to reach the password change API endpoint (typically /api/sonicwall-login/change_password or similar paths under /api/) from an unauthenticated network perspectiveAffected if The API endpoint responds to unauthenticated requests without requiring login credentials
-
Test for username enumeration via differential responsesSend password change API requests with valid usernames and invalid usernames, then compare HTTP response codes, response times, or error message content between themAffected if The server returns measurably different responses for valid usernames versus invalid usernames
-
Review authentication logs for enumeration patternsExamine SMA authentication logs (available via 'Log > Authentication' in the web UI or via syslog) for repeated password change API calls with different username values in a short timeframeAffected if Logs show repeated password change API requests from unauthenticated sources or patterns indicative of username probing
A defender is affected if the SMA device runs a firmware version within the listed ranges AND the password change API permits unauthenticated access that yields distinguishable responses for valid versus invalid usernames.
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.
dbcve · scoped10.0.0.0
Apply the vendor-supplied patch or update to a fixed SonicWall SMA100 firmware version. If immediate patching is not feasible, monitor authentication logs for anomalous password change API access patterns and consider restricting access to the password change interface via firewall rules.
Latest available SMA 100 series firmware (10.2.1.x or higher stable release from SonicWall)
- 1. Identify the current firmware version of the affected SMA device by accessing the management interface or using the command line interface.
- 2. Access the SonicWall support portal at psirt.global.sonicwall.com to obtain the latest firmware version for your specific SMA model (100, 200, 210, 400, 410, or 500v).
- 3. Download the latest stable firmware release from the SonicWall support portal.
- 4. Backup the current device configuration through the web management interface under System > Settings > Backup/Restore.
- 5. Upload and install the new firmware through the device's firmware update functionality (typically found under System > Settings > Firmware Update).
- 6. After installation, verify the device is operational and confirm the new firmware version is applied.
- 7. Test that the password change API no longer reveals username existence through differential server responses.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-20049 — 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-2021-20049 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