dbcve.org
Data Exchange Management StudioApplication · Unisys

CVE-2022-32555

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-09-13
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Unisys Data Exchange Management Studio before 6.0.IC2 and 7.x before 7.0.IC1 doesn't have an Anti-CSRF token to authenticate the POST request. Thus, a cross-site request forgery attack could occur.

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

Unisys Data Exchange Management Studio versions prior to 6.0.IC2 and 7.x prior to 7.0.IC1 lack anti-CSRF tokens for POST requests, allowing attackers to forge malicious requests that execute unintended actions on behalf of authenticated users.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens for all POST endpoints and validate them server-side before processing requests, combined with SameSite cookie attributes.

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
Data Exchange Management StudioApplication
Affected:= 6.0.ic1= 7.0

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
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 checks

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

  1. Confirm Unisys Data Exchange Management Studio is installed
    Look for the application in the system program list, or check for installation directories typically found under C:\Program Files\Unisys or C:\Program Files (x86)\Unisys
    Affected if The application is present on the system
  2. Identify the installed version
    Open the application, then navigate to Help > About, or check the version in the Windows Registry under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Unisys\DataExchangeManagementStudio
    Affected if The version is 6.0.ic1 or 7.0 specifically, or falls within the range prior to 6.0.IC2 or 7.0.IC1
  3. Verify POST requests lack anti-CSRF tokens
    Log into the application and capture a POST request using browser developer tools or a proxy. Examine the request headers and body for a CSRF token parameter or header such as __RequestVerificationToken, CSRFToken, or X-CSRF-TOKEN
    Affected if The POST request contains no anti-CSRF token parameter or header and the server accepts the request without validation
  4. Check SameSite cookie attributes
    In the browser developer tools, inspect the session cookie set by the application. Look at the Set-Cookie header to see if the SameSite attribute is set to Strict or Lax
    Affected if The SameSite attribute is missing or set to None without the Secure flag, increasing CSRF exposure

The system is affected if Unisys Data Exchange Management Studio version 6.0.ic1 or 7.0 (or any version prior to 6.0.IC2 or 7.0.IC1) is installed and POST requests do not include anti-CSRF tokens.

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
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement anti-CSRF tokens for all POST endpoints and validate them server-side before processing requests, combined with SameSite cookie attributes.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

6.0.IC2 (for 6.x branch) or 7.0.IC1 (for 7.x branch)

  1. Identify the current installed version of Unisys Data Exchange Management Studio
  2. If running version 6.0.ic1 or earlier, upgrade to version 6.0.IC2 or later
  3. If running version 7.0.x, upgrade to version 7.0.IC1 or later
  4. After upgrade, verify that Anti-CSRF tokens are now implemented for POST requests
  5. Test application functionality to confirm the upgrade did not break existing operations

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

Fix this in Data Exchange Management Studio Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,600
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-32555 — 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-2022-32555 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