dbcve.org
BoundaryApplication · Hashicorp

CVE-2022-36130

CRITICAL · 9.9 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-09-01
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 0.10.2 or later.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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
HashiCorp Boundary up to 0.10.1 did not properly perform data integrity checks to ensure the resources were associated with the correct scopes, allowing potential privilege escalation for authorized users of another scope. Fixed in Boundary 0.10.2.

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

HashiCorp Boundary versions up to 0.10.1 had insufficient data integrity checks that failed to properly verify resource-to-scope associations. This authorization flaw allowed authenticated users in one scope to potentially access or manipulate resources belonging to a different scope, enabling privilege escalation. The vulnerability stems from missing boundary validation between scopes in the access control layer.

MitigationUpgrade HashiCorp Boundary to version 0.10.2 or later to apply the patch. After upgrading, verify that scope-based access controls are functioning correctly and that resources remain properly isolated between scopes.

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
BoundaryApplication
Affected:< 0.10.2

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
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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. Check installed Boundary version
    Run 'boundary --version' or check the version of the boundary package/service running in your environment. Compare this version against the affected range (versions prior to 0.10.2).
    Affected if The installed version is less than 0.10.2
  2. Verify multi-scope architecture is in use
    Run 'boundary scopes list -scope-id=global' to list top-level organization scopes. If only the global scope exists or no organizational hierarchy is configured, the vulnerability has limited impact.
    Affected if Multiple organization scopes exist and projects are organized under different scopes (multi-tenant or multi-team setup)
  3. Identify users with cross-scope access
    Run 'boundary users list' and for each user, check their grants using 'boundary users read -id=<user-id>' to see if they have permissions spanning multiple scopes (e.g., grants containing different scope IDs).
    Affected if Users have grants or role assignments that grant access to resources in scopes different from their primary scope
  4. Check for roles with broad scope permissions
    Run 'boundary roles list' and examine role grants using 'boundary roles read -id=<role-id>'. Look for grants that permit actions on resources in scopes other than where the role is defined.
    Affected if Roles contain grants authorizing actions on resources outside their defined scope scope
  5. Verify scope-based resource isolation
    List resources in different scopes (e.g., 'boundary targets list -scope-id=<org-id>' for different orgs) and attempt to verify that users in one scope cannot enumerate or access targets in another scope through direct API calls.
    Affected if Users can successfully access, list, or manipulate resources in scopes they are not explicitly authorized to access

You are affected if your Boundary version is below 0.10.2 AND you use a multi-scope architecture (multiple organizations or projects) with users or roles that span different scopes.

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 0.10.2 or later
Fixed in 0.10.2
Interim mitigation

Upgrade HashiCorp Boundary to version 0.10.2 or later to apply the patch. After upgrading, verify that scope-based access controls are functioning correctly and that resources remain properly isolated between scopes.

Recommended fix High confidence

Boundary 0.10.2

  1. 1. Back up the Boundary database and configuration files before upgrading.
  2. 2. Download Boundary version 0.10.2 from the official HashiCorp releases page.
  3. 3. Stop the running Boundary controller and worker services.
  4. 4. Install Boundary 0.10.2 following the standard upgrade procedure for your deployment method (e.g., binary, container, or package manager).
  5. 5. Start the Boundary services and verify the controller and workers are operational.
  6. 6. Test that users can only access resources within their correct scopes to confirm the vulnerability is remediated.

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

Fix this in Boundary Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,440
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,504.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-36130 — 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-2022-36130 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