dbcve.org
Debian LinuxOperating system · Debian

CVE-2022-23480

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-12-09
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 0.9.21 or later.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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
xrdp is an open source project which provides a graphical login to remote machines using Microsoft Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP). xrdp < v0.9.21 contain a buffer over flow in devredir_proc_client_devlist_announce_req() function. There are no known workarounds for this issue. Users are advised to upgrade.

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

xrdp versions prior to 0.9.21 contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in the devredir_proc_client_devlist_announce_req() function, which handles device redirection client requests. This critical flaw in the open-source RDP server could allow remote unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code via specially crafted device list announcement requests.

MitigationUpgrade xrdp to version 0.9.21 or later. No workarounds exist for this vulnerability; immediate patching is recommended given the CVSS 9.8 critical severity.

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
Debian LinuxOperating system
Affected:= 11.0
XrdpApplication
Affected:< 0.9.21

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
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 checks

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

  1. Check installed xrdp package version
    Run 'dpkg -l xrdp' on Debian/Ubuntu, or 'rpm -qi xrdp' on RHEL/CentOS, or 'xrdp --version' if the binary is in PATH
    Affected if The version displayed is lower than 0.9.21 or the package is not found (meaning xrdp may not be installed)
  2. Check if xrdp service is active
    Run 'systemctl status xrdp' or 'service xrdp status' to verify if the xrdp daemon is running
    Affected if The service is running and accepting connections, exposing the vulnerable code path
  3. Verify device redirection module presence
    The devredir component is built into xrdp by default. Check for xrdp binaries in /usr/sbin/xrdp or /usr/local/sbin/xrdp, and look for devredir related files in the xrdp installation directory
    Affected if The xrdp installation includes the devredir module (present in all standard xrdp builds before 0.9.21)
  4. Compare version against vulnerability range
    If xrdp is installed, compare the exact version number to the affected range: any version prior to 0.9.21 is vulnerable
    Affected if The installed version is any release prior to xrdp 0.9.21 (e.g., 0.9.20, 0.9.19, 0.9.18, etc.)

You are affected if xrdp is installed and running with any version prior to 0.9.21, as the vulnerable devredir_proc_client_devlist_announce_req() function is present in all earlier releases.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 0.9.21 or later
Fixed in 0.9.21
Interim mitigation

Upgrade xrdp to version 0.9.21 or later. No workarounds exist for this vulnerability; immediate patching is recommended given the CVSS 9.8 critical severity.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

xrdp v0.9.21 or later

  1. Update your package lists: sudo apt update
  2. Upgrade xrdp to the fixed version: sudo apt install xrdp (or sudo apt upgrade xrdp)
  3. Verify the installed version matches or exceeds v0.9.21: xrdp -v
  4. Restart the xrdp service if it was running: sudo systemctl restart xrdp

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Debian Linux Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
8.0 hours of engineering $1,390
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-23480 — 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-2022-23480 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