dbcve.org
Webex MeetingsApplication · Cisco

CVE-2022-20820

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-08-10
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
58/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable

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 · unedited
Multiple vulnerabilities in the web interface of Cisco Webex Meetings could allow a remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack or a frame hijacking attack against a user of the web interface. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.

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 · moderate confidence

Multiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Webex Meetings web interface allow cross-site scripting (XSS) and frame hijacking attacks. XSS enables injection of malicious scripts into pages viewed by users, while frame hijacking allows attackers to manipulate embedded frames to perform clickjacking or UI redress attacks.

MitigationImplement proper input validation and output encoding to prevent XSS; add X-Frame-Options DENY or SAMEORIGIN headers and Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directive to prevent frame hijacking.

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
Webex MeetingsApplication
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify your Webex Meetings deployment type
    Determine if you are using Cisco's hosted Webex Meetings service (SaaS) or an on-premises Webex Meeting Server (WBS) installation. Check your contract, admin console, or documentation for deployment details.
    Affected if Using any version of Cisco Webex Meetings (SaaS or on-prem) as all versions are affected
  2. Check for X-Frame-Options header on Webex URLs
    Visit your organization's Webex meeting URL (such as webex.com or your custom Webex domain) and inspect HTTP response headers using browser DevTools (Network tab) or a command-line tool like 'curl -I <webex-url>'. Look for X-Frame-Options header.
    Affected if The X-Frame-Options header is missing or set to a permissive value (e.g., ALLOW-FROM without DENY or SAMEORIGIN)
  3. Check for Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directive
    Inspect the CSP header in HTTP responses from your Webex URLs using browser DevTools or curl. Look for the frame-ancestors directive within the Content-Security-Policy header.
    Affected if The frame-ancestors directive is missing or allows untrusted origins, indicating vulnerability to frame hijacking
  4. Verify Webex admin console for XSS protection settings
    If you have admin access to Webex Management or Webex Control Hub, navigate to Site Administration > Security Settings and check if any XSS filtering or input validation options are available or enabled.
    Affected if XSS protection settings are disabled or unavailable in the admin interface

You are affected if you use Cisco Webex Meetings and the X-Frame-Options or CSP frame-ancestors headers are missing or misconfigured on your Webex web interface URLs.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement proper input validation and output encoding to prevent XSS; add X-Frame-Options DENY or SAMEORIGIN headers and Content-Security-Policy frame-ancestors directive to prevent frame hijacking.

Fix this in Webex Meetings Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,100
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,960.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-20820 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-20820 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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