GitLabApplication
CVE-2022-2527
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 · uneditedAn issue in Incident Timelines has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions starting from 14.9 before 15.1.6, all versions starting from 15.2 before 15.2.4, all versions starting from 15.3 before 15.3.2.which allowed an authenticated attacker to inject arbitrary content. A victim interacting with this content could lead to arbitrary requests.
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 confidenceA stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in GitLab's Incident Timelines feature allows authenticated attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript content. When victims view the timeline, the injected code executes, enabling the attacker to perform arbitrary requests on behalf of the authenticated victim (likely via session hijacking or CSRF).
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
GitLabApplication
>= 14.9.0, < 15.1.6>= 15.2, < 15.2.4>= 15.3, < 15.3.2CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify installed GitLab versionAccess the GitLab help page (click the Help icon or navigate to /help in your GitLab instance) or query the API endpoint GET /api/v4/version to retrieve the running version numberAffected if The version returned is 14.9.0 through 15.1.5, 15.2.0 through 15.2.3, or 15.3.0 through 15.3.1 (these fall within the vulnerable ranges)
-
Confirm Incident Timelines feature is accessibleNavigate to a project in GitLab, go to the Incidents section (available under Project > Incidents), and verify that the Timelines tab exists and is accessible to authenticated usersAffected if The Timelines feature is present and viewable by users in the affected version range
-
Check if user has permissions to create incidentsAs an authenticated user with Developer or higher role in a project, attempt to create a new incident and access the Timelines functionality within that incidentAffected if Users can create incidents and access timeline entries in the affected version range, providing an attack surface for XSS injection
Your environment is affected if you are running a GitLab version within 14.9.0 to 15.1.5, 15.2.0 to 15.2.3, or 15.3.0 to 15.3.1 AND the Incident Timelines feature is accessible to authenticated users in your instance.
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 · scoped15.1.615.2.415.3.2
Upgrade GitLab to version 15.1.6, 15.2.4, 15.3.2 or later. If immediate upgrade is not feasible, consider restricting access to the Incident Timelines feature or implementing Content Security Policy headers as a temporary mitigation.
15.1.6 (for 14.9-15.1), 15.2.4 (for 15.2), or 15.3.2 (for 15.3), or latest stable release
- Check current GitLab version using `sudo gitlab-rake gitlab:version` or `/help/version` in the web UI
- Identify the appropriate upgrade path based on your current version: 14.9.x-15.1.x upgrade to 15.1.6+, 15.2.x upgrade to 15.2.4+, or 15.3.x upgrade to 15.3.2+
- Back up your GitLab instance including database and repositories before upgrading
- Update your GitLab package repository: `sudo apt-get update` for Debian/Ubuntu or `sudo yum check-update` for RHEL/CentOS
- Install the updated GitLab package matching your distribution (e.g., `sudo apt-get install gitlab-ee` or `sudo yum install gitlab-ee`)
- Reconfigure GitLab: `sudo gitlab-ctl reconfigure`
- Restart GitLab services if required: `sudo gitlab-ctl restart`
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version again
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in GitLab
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-2527 — 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-2022-2527 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