BadgeApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2022-23108
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 · uneditedJenkins Badge Plugin 1.9 and earlier does not escape the description and does not check for allowed protocols when creating a badge, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers with Item/Configure permission.
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 confidenceThe Jenkins Badge Plugin versions 1.9 and earlier contains a stored XSS vulnerability where the badge description field is not properly escaped during rendering, and protocol validation is not enforced when creating badges. Attackers with Item/Configure permission can inject malicious scripts via the description field.
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
BadgeApplication
<= 1.9CVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify Badge Plugin is installedIn Jenkins, go to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed and search for 'Badge Plugin', or check the plugin directory on the Jenkins master for the badge plugin JAR file.Affected if Badge Plugin appears in the installed plugins list
-
Determine Badge Plugin versionIn Jenkins, go to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed, find Badge Plugin, and note the version number shown. Compare against the affected version range (1.9 and earlier).Affected if The installed version is 1.9 or lower
-
Confirm plugin is enabledIn Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed, verify that Badge Plugin shows as 'Enabled' or 'Active' status.Affected if The plugin is enabled and in use
-
Identify users with Item/Configure permissionReview Jenkins authorization matrix or project-based security settings to determine which users or groups have Item/Configure or Item/ExtendedRead permissions on the affected jobs or views.Affected if Multiple or untrusted users have Item/Configure permission on badge-enabled jobs
-
Inspect badge configuration for description contentExamine job configurations that use the Badge Plugin (look for 'Add Badge' build step or post-build action) and review any description fields that may contain user-supplied content.Affected if Badge descriptions accept or display user-controlled input without sanitization
You are affected if the Jenkins Badge Plugin version 1.9 or earlier is installed, enabled, and users with Item/Configure permission can configure badges with arbitrary description content.
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 dataUpgrade the Jenkins Badge Plugin to version 1.10 or later which contains the fix for proper description escaping and protocol validation. Alternatively, restrict Item/Configure permissions to trusted users only until the upgrade can be applied.
Fix this in Badge
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-23108 — 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-2022-23108 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