CVE-2022-26305
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 Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in LibreOffice existed where determining if a macro was signed by a trusted author was done by only matching the serial number and issuer string of the used certificate with that of a trusted certificate. This is not sufficient to verify that the macro was actually signed with the certificate. An adversary could therefore create an arbitrary certificate with a serial number and an issuer string identical to a trusted certificate which LibreOffice would present as belonging to the trusted author, potentially leading to the user to execute arbitrary code contained in macros improperly trusted. This issue affects: The Document Foundation LibreOffice 7.2 versions prior to 7.2.7; 7.3 versions prior to 7.3.1.
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 confidenceLibreOffice macro signature verification incorrectly trusted certificates by only matching serial numbers and issuer strings without verifying the cryptographic signature on the macro itself. This allowed attackers to create fraudulent certificates with matching serial/issuer details to impersonate trusted authors and execute arbitrary code via malicious macros.
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>= 7.2.0, < 7.2.7>= 7.3.0, < 7.3.2CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Check installed LibreOffice versionOpen LibreOffice, go to Help > About LibreOffice (or LibreOffice Writer > About LibreOffice on Mac) to view the exact version numberAffected if The version is 7.2.0 through 7.2.6, or 7.3.0 through 7.3.1 (these are the vulnerable versions)
-
Verify macro security settingsGo to Tools > Options > Security > Macro Security (or LibreOffice > Preferences > Security > Macro Security on Mac) and check the macro execution security levelAffected if Macros are allowed to run (security level is set to Medium or Low, or macros are generally enabled)
-
Identify digitally signed macros in documentsOpen any macro-enabled documents (look for .odt, .ods, .odp, .docm, .xlsm files) and check their macro signatures via Tools > Options > Security > Macro Security > Signatures tabAffected if Documents contain macros with digital signatures from certificates where the issuer name and serial number match a trusted certificate but the cryptographic signature may not be properly verified
You are affected if your LibreOffice version falls within 7.2.0-7.2.6 or 7.3.0-7.3.1 AND you have macro security settings that permit running signed macros from potentially untrusted sources.
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 · scoped7.2.77.3.2
Update LibreOffice to version 7.2.7 or later, or 7.3.1 or later. Additionally, review and re-sign macros with properly validated certificates after patching.
LibreOffice 7.2.7 or 7.3.2 (or later stable release)
- Check your current LibreOffice version by opening Help > About LibreOffice
- For Debian/Ubuntu-based systems: Run 'sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade libreoffice'
- For Red Hat/Fedora-based systems: Run 'sudo dnf update libreoffice'
- For macOS: Use the built-in update feature via LibreOffice > Check for Updates, or download from the official website
- For Windows: Use Help > Check for Updates or download from https://www.libreoffice.org/download/download/
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking Help > About LibreOffice shows version 7.2.7, 7.3.2, or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-26305 — 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-2022-26305 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