dbcve.org
InmailxApplication · Digitus

CVE-2022-27105

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-07-26
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 3.22.0101 or later.
See remediation →
58/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable

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 · unedited
InMailX Outlook Plugin < 3.22.0101 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS). InMailX Connection names are not sanitzed in the Outlook tab, which allows a local user or network administrator to execute HTML / Javascript in the Outlook of users.

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 confidence

InMailX Outlook Plugin versions before 3.22.0101 are vulnerable to stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). The plugin fails to sanitize connection names displayed in the Outlook tab, allowing a malicious local user or network administrator to inject arbitrary HTML or JavaScript code that executes in the Outlook clients of other users.

MitigationUpdate InMailX Outlook Plugin to version 3.22.0101 or later, which includes proper sanitization of connection names to prevent XSS injection.

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
InmailxApplication
Affected:>= 3.21.0601, < 3.22.0101

CVSS 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
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check installed InMailX version
    Open Outlook, navigate to File > Options > Add-ins or check the InMailX plugin tab/ribbon to find the version information. Alternatively, check Windows Programs and Features for the installed InMailX version.
    Affected if version is 3.21.0601 or higher but lower than 3.22.0101
  2. Verify InMailX plugin is enabled in Outlook
    Go to File > Options > Add-ins and confirm InMailX is listed as an active COM add-in.
    Affected if the plugin is enabled and the version is in the affected range
  3. Confirm connection name feature is in use
    Look for the InMailX tab or section in Outlook that displays connection/server names. This is where the unsanitized connection name would be rendered.
    Affected if connection names are displayed in Outlook and the plugin version is vulnerable
  4. Review connection configuration
    Check the InMailX settings or configuration panel where connection or server names are defined and displayed within Outlook.
    Affected if custom connection names are configured and the plugin version falls within 3.21.0601 to 3.22.0100

You are affected if InMailX version is 3.21.0601 through 3.22.0100 and the plugin is actively displaying connection names in Outlook.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 3.22.0101 or later
Fixed in 3.22.0101
Interim mitigation

Update InMailX Outlook Plugin to version 3.22.0101 or later, which includes proper sanitization of connection names to prevent XSS injection.

Recommended fix High confidence

3.22.0101 or later

  1. Identify the current InMailX version installed in Outlook
  2. Download InMailX version 3.22.0101 or later from the official vendor source (www.inmailx.com)
  3. Backup any critical configuration data or emails if needed
  4. Uninstall the current vulnerable InMailX plugin from Outlook
  5. Install the updated InMailX version 3.22.0101
  6. Restart Outlook to ensure the new plugin loads properly
  7. Verify the fix by testing that connection names are properly sanitized and no longer accept unsanitized HTML/JavaScript input

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Inmailx Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,540
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,464.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-27105 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-27105 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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