CVE-2022-44009
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 · uneditedImproper access control in Key-Value RBAC in StackStorm version 3.7.0 didn't check the permissions in Jinja filters, allowing attackers to access K/V pairs of other users, potentially leading to the exposure of sensitive Information.
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 confidenceStackStorm 3.7.0 has an improper access control vulnerability in its Key-Value (K/V) RBAC system where Jinja filters fail to enforce permission checks. This allows authenticated attackers to access K/V pairs belonging to other users by leveraging Jinja template processing that bypasses RBAC enforcement, leading to unauthorized exposure of sensitive data.
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= 3.7.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 StackStorm installation versionRun 'st2 --version' or check the package manager for the installed StackStorm version to confirm it is 3.7.0Affected if The installed version is exactly 3.7.0
-
Verify K/V store is enabled and in useCheck if the StackStorm K/V store (st2kv) feature is configured and actively storing secrets or configuration data. Look for references to 'st2kv' in workflows, actions, or configurations.Affected if K/V store is enabled and contains data that should be protected by RBAC
-
Confirm Jinja templating accesses K/V pairsReview StackStorm workflows, actions, and sensors for Jinja expressions that reference K/V store keys (typically using 'st2kv.system.' or 'st2kv.user.' syntax)Affected if Jinja templates are used to retrieve K/V data within the environment
-
Inspect RBAC configuration for K/V permissionsExamine the StackStorm RBAC definitions (typically in /opt/stackstorm/rbac/ or via 'st2 rbac list' command) to verify if explicit permission grants exist for K/V store accessAffected if RBAC is defined but does not enforce permission checks on Jinja-filter-based K/V access
-
Check for cross-user K/V access patternsReview audit logs or usage patterns to determine if any user has accessed K/V pairs belonging to other users or system keys they should not have permission to viewAffected if Users have been able to access K/V pairs outside their assigned permission scope
A user is affected if they are running StackStorm version 3.7.0 with the K/V store feature enabled and Jinja templating is used to access K/V pairs, as RBAC enforcement does not apply to these template-based accesses.
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 dataImplement and enforce permission validation in all Jinja filters accessing K/V stores to ensure RBAC checks are performed before returning any K/V data. Additionally, audit existing K/V access patterns and consider rotating any potentially exposed sensitive credentials or secrets.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-44009 — 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-2022-44009 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