RqmApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2022-34810
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 · uneditedA missing check in Jenkins RQM Plugin 2.8 and earlier allows attackers with Overall/Read permission to enumerate credentials IDs of credentials stored in Jenkins.
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 confidenceThe Jenkins RQM Plugin 2.8 and earlier lacks proper authorization checks on certain API endpoints, allowing any authenticated user with basic Overall/Read permission to enumerate credential IDs stored in Jenkins' credential store. This is an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability that exposes internal credential identifiers which could aid attackers in targeting specific credentials for further exploitation.
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
RqmApplication
<= 2.8CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check if RQM Plugin is installedGo to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for 'RQM' or navigate to Manage Jenkins > System and look for 'RQM' configuration sectionAffected if RQM Plugin appears in the installed plugins list
-
Determine installed RQM Plugin versionIn Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab, locate the RQM Plugin and note the version number displayedAffected if Version is 2.8 or earlier (e.g., 2.8, 2.7, 2.6, etc.)
-
Verify credentials exist in JenkinsGo to Manage Jenkins > Credentials and check if any credentials are stored, particularly those related to RQM or external integrationsAffected if Credentials are configured in Jenkins' credential store
-
Check user permissions configurationGo to Manage Jenkins > Manage Users and review which users have Overall/Read permission, or check Configure Global Security for authorization matrix settingsAffected if There are users with Overall/Read permission who should not be able to view credential identifiers
You are affected if the RQM Plugin version is 2.8 or earlier AND credentials are configured in Jenkins AND untrusted users have Overall/Read permission.
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 dataUpgrade to RQM Plugin version 2.9 or later which includes the missing authorization check, or restrict Overall/Read permissions to only trusted users if upgrading is not immediately possible.
Fix this in Rqm
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-34810 — 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-2022-34810 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