A vulnerability in the Pulse Connect Secure / Pulse Policy Secure < 9.1R9 is vulnerable to arbitrary cookie injection.
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 18/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 2.1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 81.8% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. A user must open a link or visit a page. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
- Published
- Oct 28, 2020
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 2.1% · 81th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-120
Report tools
Action score
18
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 17 / 40 · 4.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 2.1%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| ivanti | connect secure | cpe:2.3:a:ivanti:connect_secure |
| ivanti | policy secure | cpe:2.3:a:ivanti:policy_secure |
| pulsesecure | pulse connect secure | cpe:2.3:a:pulsesecure:pulse_connect_secure |
| pulsesecure | pulse policy secure | cpe:2.3:a:pulsesecure:pulse_policy_secure |
Using connect secure? Add it to your stack and be the first to know about CVEs like this one. (VPN gateway)
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- ivanti connect secure9.1
- pulsesecure pulse connect securebefore 9.1
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (hackerone). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
n/a Pulse Connect Secure / Pulse Policy Secure
- 9.1R9affected
Same product
ivanti: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-11510In Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) 8.2 before 8.2R12.1, 8.3 before 8.3R7.1, and 9.0 before 9.0R3.4, an unauthenticated remote attackKEV100Now
- CVE-2025-22457A stack-based buffer overflow in Ivanti Connect Secure before version 22.7R2.6, Ivanti Policy Secure before version 22.7R1.4, and Ivanti ZTAKEV99Now
- CVE-2025-0282A stack-based buffer overflow in Ivanti Connect Secure before version 22.7R2.5, Ivanti Policy Secure before version 22.7R1.2, and Ivanti NeuKEV96Now
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2020-15352Oct 27, 2020 · An XML external entity (XXE) vulnerability in Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) before 9.1R9 and Pulse Policy Secure (PPS) before 9.1R9 allows remo29Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2020-8260Oct 28, 2020 · A vulnerability in the Pulse Connect Secure < 9.1R9 admin web interface could allow an authenticated attacker to perform an arbitrary code eKEV87Now
- Later →CVE-2020-8262Oct 28, 2020 · A vulnerability in the Pulse Connect Secure / Pulse Policy Secure below 9.1R9 could allow attackers to conduct Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) an25Monitor
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.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- low · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- Low
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-120 · Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Root cause
When data is copied, the source length is not compared with the size of the destination buffer. Excess data overwrites adjacent memory.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-120 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
char buf[256];memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);Fixed
char buf[256];if (pkt->len > sizeof(buf)) { return -EINVAL;}memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);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)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Overflow BuffersCAPEC-100likelihood: High · Very High
- Client-side Injection-induced Buffer OverflowCAPEC-14likelihood: Medium · High
- Filter Failure through Buffer OverflowCAPEC-24likelihood: High · High
- MIME ConversionCAPEC-42likelihood: High · High
- Overflow Binary Resource FileCAPEC-44likelihood: High · Very High
- Buffer Overflow via Symbolic LinksCAPEC-45likelihood: High · High
- Overflow Variables and TagsCAPEC-46likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.