CVE-2022-23131
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 · uneditedIn the case of instances where the SAML SSO authentication is enabled (non-default), session data can be modified by a malicious actor, because a user login stored in the session was not verified. Malicious unauthenticated actor may exploit this issue to escalate privileges and gain admin access to Zabbix Frontend. To perform the attack, SAML authentication is required to be enabled and the actor has to know the username of Zabbix user (or use the guest account, which is disabled by default).
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 confidenceZabbix Frontend has a session validation bypass where SAML SSO-enabled instances fail to verify the user login stored in session data. An unauthenticated attacker with knowledge of a valid username (or the guest account) can modify session data to escalate privileges to admin access.
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>= 5.4.0, <= 5.4.8= 6.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Confirm SAML authentication is enabledLog into Zabbix frontend as administrator, navigate to Administration > Authentication > SAML Settings, or inspect the Zabbix configuration file for SAML-related parameters.Affected if SAML authentication is disabled - the vulnerability does not apply. If SAML is enabled, proceed to version check.
-
Determine the installed Zabbix versionCheck the Zabbix frontend footer for version number, or query the Zabbix API endpoint /zabbix/apiinfo/version, or check the package manager for installed zabbix packages.Affected if The installed version falls outside the affected range (5.4.0 to 5.4.8 inclusive, or exactly 6.0.0). Versions outside this range are not affected.
-
Inspect active sessions for validationIn Zabbix frontend, navigate to Reports > Audit log or check user session data in the database to review recent administrative actions and session origins.Affected if SAML is enabled AND version is within affected range - the session validation flaw exists and could allow user impersonation.
-
Review admin account integrityNavigate to Administration > Users > Users list and verify that all accounts with Admin or Super Admin roles were intentionally created and show no unexpected changes to permissions or group memberships.Affected if SAML is enabled AND version is in affected range - compromise through this vulnerability may have occurred if any admin account shows unauthorized modifications.
A Zabbix instance is affected only if SAML SSO authentication is enabled AND the installed Zabbix version is 5.4.0 through 5.4.8 or exactly 6.0.0; if SAML is disabled, this vulnerability does not apply.
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 · scopedDisable SAML authentication if not required, ensure guest account remains disabled, and apply vendor patches to implement proper session user verification.
Zabbix 5.4.9 or later, or Zabbix 6.0.1 or later (6.0 LTS recommended for long-term support)
- 1. Verify SAML SSO authentication is currently enabled in your Zabbix installation by navigating to Administration > Authentication > SAML settings.
- 2. Backup your Zabbix database and configuration files before proceeding with the upgrade.
- 3. Download the fixed Zabbix version (5.4.9 or later for the 5.4.x branch, or 6.0.1 or later for the 6.0.x branch) from the official Zabbix repository at https://www.zabbix.com/download.
- 4. Stop the Zabbix server, web server, and proxy services.
- 5. Upgrade the Zabbix packages using your system's package manager (e.g., apt-get, yum, or dnf) following the official upgrade procedure for your Linux distribution.
- 6. Start the Zabbix services and verify the upgrade was successful.
- 7. Log in to the Zabbix frontend and navigate to Administration > Authentication > SAML to confirm SAML settings are intact.
- 8. Test SAML authentication to ensure single sign-on still functions correctly after the upgrade.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-23131 — 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-2022-23131 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