Debian LinuxOperating system · Debian
CVE-2022-23481
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 · uneditedxrdp 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 Out of Bound Read in xrdp_caps_process_confirm_active() 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 · high confidencexrdp versions before v0.9.21 contain an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the xrdp_caps_process_confirm_active() function. This memory safety flaw allows reading data beyond allocated buffer boundaries, potentially exposing sensitive memory contents to remote attackers via RDP connections.
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
= 11.0< 0.9.21CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Verify xrdp is installedRun 'dpkg -l | grep xrdp' on Debian-based systems, or 'rpm -qa | grep xrdp' on RHEL-based systems, or check for the xrdp binary with 'which xrdp'Affected if xrdp package or binary is found on the system
-
Retrieve installed xrdp versionRun 'xrdp -v' or 'xrdp --version' to display the version number, or use package manager query like 'dpkg -s xrdp' or 'rpm -qi xrdp'Affected if Version output is displayed and is lower than 0.9.21
-
Confirm version comparisonCompare the retrieved version against the affected range: any version before 0.9.21 (e.g., 0.9.20, 0.9.19, 0.9.18, etc.) is vulnerableAffected if Installed version is less than 0.9.21 or the version cannot be determined (older installation)
-
Check if RDP service is activeRun 'systemctl status xrdp' or 'service xrdp status' to see if the xrdp service is running and accepting connectionsAffected if xrdp service is active and listening on RDP ports (default 3389)
The system is affected if xrdp is installed with a version lower than 0.9.21 and the service is enabled, as the vulnerable xrdp_caps_process_confirm_active() function can be triggered via incoming RDP connections.
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 · scoped0.9.21
Upgrade xrdp to v0.9.21 or later to patch the vulnerability. No workarounds exist; immediate patching is required given the critical CVSS score of 9.1.
xrdp v0.9.21
- Update your package repository: sudo apt-get update
- Upgrade xrdp to version 0.9.21 or later: sudo apt-get install xrdp
- Verify the installed version matches or exceeds 0.9.21: xrdp --version
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
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 locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-23481 — 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-2022-23481 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