Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) did not implement account lockout.
Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) did not implement account lockout. Local account credentials may be extracted from the device via brute force guessing attacks.
- Published
- Mar 13, 2020
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.0% · 63th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-307
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.0%
Affected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| xerox | phaser 3320 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:xerox:phaser_3320_firmware |
| xerox | phaser 3320 | cpe:2.3:h:xerox:phaser_3320 |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- xerox phaser 3320 firmwarev53.006.16.000
Same product
xerox: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-13172Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) were affected by a buffer overflow vulnerability in the Authentication Cookie o40Plan
- CVE-2019-13171Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) were affected by one or more stack-based buffer overflow vulnerabilities in the40Plan
- CVE-2019-13169Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) were affected by a buffer overflow vulnerability in the Content-Type HTTP Heade40Plan
- CVE-2019-13168Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) were affected by a buffer overflow vulnerability in the attributes parser of th40Plan
- CVE-2019-13165Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) were affected by a buffer overflow vulnerability in the request parser of the I40Plan
- CVE-2019-13170Some Xerox printers (such as the Phaser 3320 V53.006.16.000) did not implement any mechanism to avoid CSRF attacks.26Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-307 · Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication AttemptsCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Dictionary-based Password AttackCAPEC-16likelihood: Medium · High
- Password Brute ForcingCAPEC-49likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Domain CredentialsCAPEC-560likelihood: High · High
- Password SprayingCAPEC-565likelihood: High · High
- Credential StuffingCAPEC-600likelihood: High · High
- Use of Known Kerberos CredentialsCAPEC-652likelihood: Medium · High
- Use of Known Operating System CredentialsCAPEC-653likelihood: High · High
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpChange log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
- security.business.xerox.com/
- www.nccgroup.trust/us/our-research/technical-advisory-multiple-vulnerabilities-in-xerox-printers/
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.