CVE-2022-39358
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 · uneditedMetabase is data visualization software. Prior to versions 0.44.5, 1.44.5, 0.43.7, 1.43.7, 0.42.6, and 1.42.6, it was possible to circumvent locked parameters when requesting data for a question in an embedded dashboard by constructing a malicious request to the backend. This issue is patched in versions 0.44.5, 1.44.5, 0.43.7, 1.43.7, 0.42.6, and 1.42.6.
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 · moderate confidenceMetabase embedded dashboards support locked parameters to restrict data access. This vulnerability allowed attackers to bypass those locked parameter restrictions by constructing malicious backend requests, enabling unauthorized data access to questions within embedded dashboards. This is a parameter tampering/authorization bypass in the embedding functionality.
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>= 0.42.0, < 0.42.6>= 0.43.0, < 0.43.7>= 0.44.0, < 0.44.5>= 1.42.0, < 1.42.6>= 1.43.0, < 1.43.7>= 1.44.0, < 1.44.5CVSS 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.
-
Identify Metabase versionCheck the Metabase admin panel under Settings > About, or query the /api/health endpoint, or inspect the JAR file name if self-hostedAffected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: 0.42.0-0.42.5, 0.43.0-0.43.6, 0.44.0-0.44.4, 1.42.0-1.42.5, 1.43.0-1.43.6, or 1.44.0-1.44.4
-
Confirm embedding feature is in useReview Metabase admin panel under Admin > Embedding, or query the embedding_enabled setting via API, or check for published embedding secrets in your deploymentAffected if Embedding is enabled and there are embedded dashboards or questions in production use
-
Audit embedded content with locked parametersReview all embedded dashboards in Admin > Embedding > Published dashboards, and for each verify whether locked parameters are configured under the Embedding preview paneAffected if Any embedded dashboards have locked parameters configured to restrict data access; these are the specific targets of this bypass vulnerability
-
Inspect embedding secretsCheck the embedding signing secret in Admin > Embedding > Advanced init settings, and review any external applications that consume embedded contentAffected if External applications have the ability to craft custom backend requests to the Metabase instance using the embedding secrets
You are affected if Metabase version is in the vulnerable ranges AND embedding is enabled with locked parameters on any embedded dashboards.
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 · scoped0.42.60.43.70.44.5
Upgrade to patched versions (0.44.5, 1.44.5, 0.43.7, 1.43.7, 0.42.6, or 1.42.6). Until upgrade is possible, audit all embedded dashboard configurations and implement request monitoring for parameter tampering patterns.
0.44.5, 1.44.5, 0.43.7, 1.43.7, 0.42.6, or 1.42.6 (minimum appropriate for your version branch)
- 1. Backup your current Metabase database and configuration
- 2. Identify your current Metabase version in the admin settings
- 3. Determine which version branch you're on (0.42.x, 0.43.x, 0.44.x, or 1.42.x, 1.43.x, 1.44.x)
- 4. Download the appropriate fixed version for your branch: 0.42.6, 0.43.7, 0.44.5, 1.42.6, 1.43.7, or 1.44.5
- 5. Stop the Metabase service
- 6. Install the new version following standard Metabase upgrade procedures
- 7. Restart Metabase service
- 8. Verify that embedded dashboards with locked parameters properly enforce the locks
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-39358 — 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-2022-39358 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