Answer in brief
CVE-2020-6096 records a High severity (CVSS 8.1) vulnerability in CVE Program Container. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps n/a/GNU glibc (generic), Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (generic), Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP (generic), Siemens/SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
CVSS is 8.1. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps n/a/GNU glibc (generic), Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (generic), Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP (generic), Siemens/SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| n/a/GNU glibcgeneric | 2.30.9000 | Not reported |
| Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.0 <V3.1.5 | V3.1.5 |
| Siemens/SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.0 <V3.1.5 | V3.1.5 |
| Siemens/SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFPgeneric | >=V3.1.0 <V3.1.5 | V3.1.5 |
Published upstream
Apr 1, 2020
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Oct 14, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Oct 14, 2026
An exploitable signed comparison vulnerability exists in the ARMv7 memcpy() implementation of GNU glibc 2.30.9000. Calling memcpy() (on ARMv7 targets that utilize the GNU glibc implementation) with a negative value for the 'num' parameter results in a signed comparison vulnerability. If an attacker underflows the 'num' parameter to memcpy(), this vulnerability could lead to undefined behavior such as writing to out-of-bounds memory and potentially remote code execution. Furthermore, this memcpy() implementation allows for program execution to continue in scenarios where a segmentation fault or crash should have occurred. The dangers occur in that subsequent execution and iterations of this code will be executed with this corrupted data.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.