ArtemisApplication · Apache
CVE-2022-35278
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 · uneditedIn Apache ActiveMQ Artemis prior to 2.24.0, an attacker could show malicious content and/or redirect users to a malicious URL in the web console by using HTML in the name of an address or queue.
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 confidenceThis is a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Apache ActiveMQ Artemis web console. An attacker can inject malicious HTML/JavaScript into the name field of an address or queue. When legitimate users view these names in the web console, the injected code executes, enabling session hijacking, credential theft, or redirection to malicious sites.
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
ArtemisApplication
< 2.24.0all versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Apache Artemis versionCheck the version of Apache Artemis by examining the lib/artemis-server-*.jar file name, running 'artemis --version', or checking the version.properties file in the installation directoryAffected if The version is below 2.24.0
-
Verify web console is accessibleConfirm the Artemis web console is enabled and reachable by accessing the console URL (default: http://localhost:8161/hawtio) or checking the bootstrap.xml configuration file for web server settingsAffected if The web console is enabled and exposed
-
Check for NetApp Active IQ Unified ManagerIdentify if NetApp Active IQ Unified Manager is installed by checking for its installation directory or running service process, as all versions are affectedAffected if The product is installed and running with web interface accessible
-
Inspect queue and address names in configurationExamine the broker configuration XML files (broker.xml or related configuration) for any queue or address names that may contain HTML or script tags, or check via the web console address/queue list viewsAffected if Queue or address names contain unsanitized HTML or JavaScript content
You are affected if you run Apache Artemis versions below 2.24.0 or any version of NetApp Active IQ Unified Manager/Oncommand Workflow Automation with the web console accessible and no input validation on queue/address names.
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 data2.24.0
Upgrade to Apache ActiveMQ Artemis version 2.24.0 or later which includes proper input sanitization for address and queue names in the web console.
Fix this in Artemis
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-35278 — 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-2022-35278 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