Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 33.13% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2020
CVE-2020-11710High confidence
NOTE: The vendor argue that this CVE is not a vulnerability because it has an inaccurate bug scope and patch links
Unknown · Unknown
9.8CriticalCVSS 3.1
Within 72 hours
Patch availableCritical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityCritical→Operational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Unknown Unknown and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
Patch available01
What, why and how
An issue was discovered in docker-kong (for Kong) through 2.0.3. The admin API port may be accessible on interfaces other than 127.0.0.1. NOTE: The vendor argue that this CVE is not a vulnerability because it has an inaccurate bug scope and patch links. “1) Inaccurate Bug Scope - The issue scope was on Kong's docker-compose template, and not Kong's docker image itself. In reality, this issue is not associated with any version of the Kong gateway. As such, the description stating ‘An issue was discovered in docker-kong (for Kong) through 2.0.3.’ is incorrect. This issue only occurs if a user decided to spin up Kong via docker-compose without following the security documentation. The docker-compose template is meant for users to quickly get started with Kong, and is meant for development purposes only. 2) Incorrect Patch Links - The CVE currently points to a documentation improvement as a “Patch” link: https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com/commit/d693827c32144943a2f45abc017c1321b33ff611.This link actually points to an improvement Kong Inc made for fool-proofing. However, instructions for how to protect the admin API were already well-documented here: https://docs.konghq.com/2.0.x/secure-admin-api/#network-layer-access-restrictions , which was first published back in 2017 (as shown in this commit: https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com/commit/e99cf875d875dd84fdb751079ac37882c9972949) Lastly, the hyperlink to https://github.com/Kong/kong (an unrelated Github Repo to this issue) on the Hyperlink list does not include any meaningful information on this topic.
What
An issue was discovered in docker-kong (for Kong) through 2.0.3. The admin API port may be accessible on interfaces other than 127.0.0.1. NOTE: The vendor argue that this CVE is not a vulnerability because it has an inaccurate bug scope and patch links. “1) Inaccurate Bug Scope - The issue scope was on Kong's docker-compose template, and not Kong's docker image itself. In reality, this issue is not associated with any version of the Kong gateway. As such, the description stating ‘An issue was discovered in docker-kong (for Kong) through 2.0.3.’ is incorrect. This issue only occurs if a user decided to spin up Kong via docker-compose without following the security documentation. The docker-compose template is meant for users to quickly get started with Kong, and is meant for development purposes only. 2) Incorrect Patch Links - The CVE currently points to a documentation improvement as a “Patch” link: https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com/commit/d693827c32144943a2f45abc017c1321b33ff611.This link actually points to an improvement Kong Inc made for fool-proofing. However, instructions for how to protect the admin API were already well-documented here: https://docs.konghq.com/2.0.x/secure-admin-api/#network-layer-access-restrictions , which was first published back in 2017 (as shown in this commit: https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com/commit/e99cf875d875dd84fdb751079ac37882c9972949) Lastly, the hyperlink to https://github.com/Kong/kong (an unrelated Github Repo to this issue) on the Hyperlink list does not include any meaningful information on this topic.
Why
The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
An issue was discovered in docker-kong (for Kong) through 2.0.3. The admin API port may be accessible on interfaces other than 127.0.0.1. NOTE: The vendor argue that this CVE is not a vulnerability because it has an inaccurate bug scope and patch links. “1) Inaccurate Bug Scope - The issue scope was on Kong's docker-compose template, and not Kong's docker image itself. In reality, this issue is not associated with any version of the Kong gateway. As such, the description stating ‘An issue was discovered in docker-kong (for Kong) through 2.0.3.’ is incorrect. This issue only occurs if a user decided to spin up Kong via docker-compose without following the security documentation. The docker-compose template is meant for users to quickly get started with Kong, and is meant for development purposes only. 2) Incorrect Patch Links - The CVE currently points to a documentation improvement as a “Patch” link: https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com/commit/d693827c32144943a2f45abc017c1321b33ff611.This link actually points to an improvement Kong Inc made for fool-proofing. However, instructions for how to protect the admin API were already well-documented here: https://docs.konghq.com/2.0.x/secure-admin-api/#network-layer-access-restrictions , which was first published back in 2017 (as shown in this commit: https://github.com/Kong/docs.konghq.com/commit/e99cf875d875dd84fdb751079ac37882c9972949) Lastly, the hyperlink to https://github.com/Kong/kong (an unrelated Github Repo to this issue) on the Hyperlink list does not include any meaningful information on this topic.
Why
The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → vulnerable operation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration. - CWE not yet assigned
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- n/a
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 12 Apr 2020 · Last source change 4 Aug 2024, 11:35 UTC · CWE not yet assigned
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2020-4052
Product sourceUnavailable
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceUnavailable
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Missing structured fields: CWE classification, affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.