CVE-2022-26309
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 · uneditedPandora FMS v7.0NG.759 allows Cross-Site Request Forgery in Bulk operation (User operation) resulting in elevation of privilege to Administrator group.
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 confidenceCross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in Pandora FMS v7.0NG.759 allows authenticated users to be tricked into performing unintended bulk user operations via forged requests, leading to privilege escalation to the Administrator group.
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<= 7.0_ng_759CVSS 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.
-
Identify Pandora FMS versionAccess the Pandora FMS console and navigate to 'Setup' > 'About' or check the footer of any console page for the version number (e.g., 7.0NG.759). Alternatively, examine the file '/pandora_console/CHANGELOG' or the database version table if you have direct access.Affected if The installed version is 7.0NG.759 or any version prior to it (e.g., 7.0NG.758, older releases).
-
Verify bulk user operations are accessibleLog into Pandora FMS as a standard authenticated user and navigate to 'User management' or 'Users' section. Look for bulk action buttons such as 'Delete selected', 'Change group', or 'Assign profile' that operate on multiple users at once.Affected if Bulk user operation features are visible and functional for non-administrator accounts.
-
Inspect for anti-CSRF tokens in user operationsUsing browser developer tools, examine the HTML forms for bulk user operations (add/edit/delete users). Check the source code of pages in the '/pandora_console/index.php?sec=usuarios' section for hidden token fields (e.g., '<input type="hidden" name=".*token.*"') or look for token parameters in POST requests.Affected if No anti-CSRF token, CSRF token, or secure token field is present in bulk user operation forms.
-
Check session cookie SameSite attributeIn browser developer tools, go to the 'Application' tab > 'Cookies' and inspect the session cookie for the Pandora FMS domain. Look for the 'SameSite' attribute in the cookie details.Affected if The session cookie has no SameSite attribute set, or SameSite is set to 'None' without Secure flag.
A user is affected if they run Pandora FMS version 7.0NG.759 or lower and the bulk user management pages lack anti-CSRF token validation in their request handling.
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.
From vendor dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens for all bulk user operations and state-changing requests, enable SameSite cookie attributes, and validate the Origin/Referer headers.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-26309 — 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-2022-26309 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