CVE-2022-38654
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 · uneditedHCL Domino is susceptible to an information disclosure vulnerability. In some scenarios, local calls made on the server to search the Domino directory will ignore xACL read restrictions. An authenticated attacker could leverage this vulnerability to access attributes from a user's person record.
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 confidenceHCL Domino contains an information disclosure vulnerability where local server-side calls to search the Domino directory bypass extended ACL (xACL) read restrictions. An authenticated attacker can exploit this to read sensitive attributes from user person records in the Domino directory.
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= 9.0.1= 10.0.0= 10.0.1= 11.0.1= 12.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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.
-
Determine installed HCL Domino versionRun 'show version' from the Domino server console, or check the program directory for version information filesAffected if Installed version matches 9.0.1, 10.0.0, 10.0.1, 11.0.1, or 12.0
-
Verify Domino Directory (names.nsf) ACL settingsOpen the Domino Directory database ACL in Domino Administrator and inspect the entries, particularly checking if xACL (extended ACL) is enabled for the directoryAffected if xACL is enabled on the Domino Directory and contains entries with read restrictions on sensitive person record attributes
-
Check for extended ACL (xACL) configuration on person documentsUse Domino Designer to open names.nsf, locate a person document, and examine the Extended ACL tab to see which fields have restricted read accessAffected if xACL restrictions exist but can be bypassed via local server-side directory searches
-
Test directory search access with restricted accountUse a low-privilege authenticated user account to perform a directory lookup or search operation locally on the server (e.g., via Domino URL commands or API)Affected if The authenticated user can read sensitive attributes (such as password hashes, certificate data, or other restricted fields) that should be blocked by xACL settings
-
Review server configuration for local call permissionsExamine the Domino server document in the Directory under Server > Server Configurations > Server_YourServerName, checking Security tab settings for 'Allow local server-side calls' or similar trust configurationsAffected if Local server-side calls are permitted without proper restrictions
A user is affected if running a listed Domino version with xACL configured on the Domino Directory, and local server-side directory searches can bypass read restrictions on sensitive person record attributes.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply the HCL Domino security patch for CVE-2022-38654 and review xACL configurations on the Domino directory to ensure proper restriction of sensitive user attributes.
HCL Domino 11.0.2 or later (12.0.x recommended)
- 1. Identify current HCL Domino version using 'tell server version' command in Domino console
- 2. Review HCL Domino 11.0.2+ or 12.0.0+ release notes for CVE-2022-38654 fixed version information at support.hcltechsw.com
- 3. Plan upgrade to a version after the affected versions (11.0.1) that includes the security fix
- 4. Test upgrade in non-production environment before deploying to production
- 5. After upgrade, verify the xACL read restrictions are properly enforced on Domino directory searches
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-38654 — 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-2022-38654 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