CVE-2018-1000022
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 · uneditedElectrum Technologies GmbH Electrum Bitcoin Wallet version prior to version 3.0.5 contains a Missing Authorization vulnerability in JSONRPC interface that can result in Bitcoin theft, if the user's wallet is not password protected. This attack appear to be exploitable via The victim must visit a web page with specially crafted javascript. This vulnerability appears to have been fixed in 3.0.5.
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 confidenceElectrum Bitcoin Wallet versions prior to 3.0.5 have a missing authorization check in their JSONRPC interface. An attacker can host a malicious webpage containing specially crafted JavaScript that, when visited by a user running Electrum with an unprotected wallet, can invoke JSONRPC commands to transfer Bitcoin out of the victim's wallet.
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< 3.0.5CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Check Electrum wallet versionOpen Electrum and navigate to Help > About, or run 'electrum --version' from command line. Compare the version number to 3.0.5.Affected if The installed version is lower than 3.0.5
-
Verify JSONRPC interface statusCheck if the Electrum daemon or wallet has JSONRPC listening on a network interface. Look for configuration options for 'rpcport' or 'rpcbind' in the Electrum configuration file or preferences.Affected if JSONRPC is enabled and bound to an IP address accessible from localhost or network (127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0)
-
Confirm wallet password protectionIn Electrum, check the wallet encryption status. Look for a password icon or indication in the wallet interface that the wallet is encrypted with a password.Affected if The wallet has NO password set or password protection is disabled
A user is affected if running Electrum versions below 3.0.5 with an unencrypted wallet and JSONRPC interface accessible (even to localhost).
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.
From vendor data3.0.5
Upgrade Electrum wallet to version 3.0.5 or later, and ensure wallets are protected with a strong password. Users should also avoid visiting untrusted websites while the wallet application is running.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-1000022 — 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-2018-1000022 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