CVE-2021-32756
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 · uneditedManageIQ is an open-source management platform. In versions prior to jansa-4, kasparov-2, and lasker-1, there is a flaw in the MiqExpression module of ManageIQ where a low privilege user could enter a crafted Ruby string which would be evaluated. Successful exploitation will allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code with root privileges on the host system. There are patches for this issue in releases named jansa-4, kasparov-2, and lasker-1. If possible, restrict users, via RBAC, to only the part of the application that they need access to. While MiqExpression is widely used throughout the product, restricting users can limit the surface of the attack.
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 confidenceA code injection vulnerability in the MiqExpression module allows low-privilege users to submit crafted Ruby strings that get dynamically evaluated by the application. Successful exploitation enables arbitrary code execution with root privileges on the host system.
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= jansa-1= jansa-2= jansa-3= kasparov-1= lasker-1CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Identify installed Manageiq versionRun 'cat /var/www/miq/vmdb/VERSION' or check the appliance UI under 'About' section to determine the exact Manageiq version running in your environmentAffected if The version matches jansa-1, jansa-2, jansa-3, kasparov-1, or lasker-1
-
Confirm MiqExpression module is accessibleCheck if the MiqExpression service or API endpoint is exposed and available to non-admin users. Look for expression builder or custom reporting features that utilize MiqExpression in the web UIAffected if Low-privilege users can access features that invoke the MiqExpression module
-
Verify dynamic evaluation is in useExamine the MiqExpression source code (typically in app/models/miq_expression.rb) for calls to eval, instance_eval, or similar dynamic Ruby evaluation methods that process user-supplied expression inputAffected if The code contains dynamic evaluation of user-provided strings without sanitization
-
Check RBAC configuration for expression featuresReview the role-based access control settings for the appliance to determine if restrictions exist on who can create or modify MiqExpression-based filters, reports, or policiesAffected if No RBAC restrictions are configured, allowing low-privilege users to create or modify expressions
Your environment is affected if you are running Manageiq version jansa-1, jansa-2, jansa-3, kasparov-1, or lasker-1 and low-privilege users have access to the MiqExpression module without proper RBAC restrictions.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply the vendor patches (jansa-4, kasparov-2, or lasker-1) and implement RBAC restrictions to limit user access to MiqExpression functionality, reducing the attack surface.
Upgrade to jansa-4, kasparov-2, or lasker-1 (lasker-1 recommended)
- Identify your current ManageIQ version (jansa-x or kasparov-x)
- Plan for upgrade during a maintenance window with proper backups
- For jansa-x users: Upgrade to jansa-4 (or later if available)
- For kasparov-1 users: Upgrade to kasparov-2 (or later if available)
- Alternative: Upgrade to lasker-1 (the latest stable release containing the fix)
- After upgrade, verify the MiqExpression module is patched by testing expression creation with a non-privileged user
- As an additional mitigation, review and restrict user permissions via RBAC to limit access to MiqExpression functionality
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-32756 — 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-2021-32756 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