CVE-2022-23679
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 · uneditedAOS-CX lacks Anti-CSRF protections in place for state-changing operations. This can potentially be exploited by an attacker to execute commands in the context of another user in ArubaOS-CX Switches version(s): AOS-CX 10.10.xxxx: 10.10.0002 and below, AOS-CX 10.09.xxxx: 10.09.1020 and below, AOS-CX 10.08.xxxx: 10.08.1060 and below, AOS-CX 10.06.xxxx: 10.06.0200 and below. Aruba has released upgrades for ArubaOS-CX Switch Devices that address this security vulnerability.
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 confidenceAOS-CX lacks Anti-CSRF protections for state-changing operations. This allows an attacker to craft malicious requests that, when triggered by an authenticated user (e.g., via a crafted link or embedded content), can execute commands in the context of that user's session.
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>= 10.06.0000, < 10.06.0210>= 10.08.0000, < 10.08.1070>= 10.09.0000, < 10.09.1030>= 10.10.0000, < 10.10.1000CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Determine AOS-CX versionRun `show version` on the switch CLI to retrieve the exact firmware versionAffected if Version falls within 10.06.0000-10.06.0209, 10.08.0000-10.08.1069, 10.09.0000-10.09.1029, or 10.10.0000-10.10.0999
-
Confirm web interface is enabledCheck switch configuration with `show http-server` or `show web-management` to verify the web UI is activeAffected if Web management interface is enabled and accessible
-
Identify state-changing operationsReview available web UI functions (e.g., configuration changes, user management, port settings) that accept user input via HTTP POST/PUT requestsAffected if State-changing operations exist in the web interface and can be triggered by an authenticated user
-
Inspect CSRF token presenceCapture an HTTP request to a state-changing endpoint (e.g., configuration save, user add) and examine if a CSRF token, anti-CSRF header, or SameSite cookie is includedAffected if HTTP requests to state-changing endpoints lack CSRF tokens or anti-CSRF headers
If the AOS-CX version is within the affected ranges and the web interface is enabled, the switch lacks CSRF protection for state-changing operations and is vulnerable.
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 · scoped10.06.021010.08.107010.09.1030
Upgrade ArubaOS-CX switches to a patched version: AOS-CX 10.10.xxxx above 10.10.0002, 10.09.xxxx above 10.09.1020, 10.08.xxxx above 10.08.1060, or 10.06.xxxx above 10.06.0200 as specified in Aruba's advisory.
Upgrade to AOS-CX 10.06.0210+ (for 10.06.x branch), 10.08.1070+ (for 10.08.x branch), 10.09.1030+ (for 10.09.x branch), or 10.10.1000+ (for 10.10.x branch)
- 1. Identify the current AOS-CX version running on the Aruba switch using 'show version' command
- 2. Determine which version branch (10.06.x, 10.08.x, 10.09.x, or 10.10.x) the current installation belongs to
- 3. For version 10.06.x: upgrade to version 10.06.0210 or later
- 4. For version 10.08.x: upgrade to version 10.08.1070 or later
- 5. For version 10.09.x: upgrade to version 10.09.1030 or later
- 6. For version 10.10.x: upgrade to version 10.10.1000 or later
- 7. Download the appropriate firmware from Aruba's support portal at https://asp.arubanetworks.com/
- 8. Follow Aruba's standard firmware upgrade procedure for AOS-CX switches
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-23679 — 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-2022-23679 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