CVE-2022-46148
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 · uneditedDiscourse is an open-source messaging platform. In versions 2.8.10 and prior on the `stable` branch and versions 2.9.0.beta11 and prior on the `beta` and `tests-passed` branches, users composing malicious messages and navigating to drafts page could self-XSS. This vulnerability can lead to a full XSS on sites which have modified or disabled Discourse’s default Content Security Policy. This issue is patched in the latest stable, beta and tests-passed versions of Discourse.
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 confidenceA stored self-XSS vulnerability in Discourse allows users to embed malicious JavaScript in draft messages. When the drafts page is accessed, the unsanitized content executes in the user's browser context. On sites with modified or disabled Content Security Policy, this can escalate to full XSS allowing session hijacking or actions as the user.
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<= 2.8.10= 2.9.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Check Discourse version via admin panelLog into the Discourse admin panel and navigate to /admin/about or check the version displayed in the admin dashboard footerAffected if The displayed version is 2.8.10 or lower, or exactly 2.9.0
-
Check Discourse version via command lineRun `git -C /var/discourse log -1 --format='%H %s'` or check for a version file in the Discourse installation directoryAffected if The version output matches 2.8.10 or lower, or shows 2.9.0
-
Verify CSP headers are configuredInspect HTTP responses from the Discourse server by running `curl -I https://your-discourse-site.com` and look for Content-Security-Policy headers, or check nginx/apache configuration for CSP directivesAffected if Content-Security-Policy header is missing, set to unsafe values, or CSP headers have been removed or disabled in the web server configuration
A user is affected if their Discourse installation version is 2.8.10 or lower, or exactly 2.9.0, AND the Content Security Policy has been modified or disabled, allowing stored XSS in draft messages to execute when the drafts page is accessed.
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 dataUpdate Discourse to the latest stable, beta, or tests-passed version. If immediate updates are not possible, review and restore Content Security Policy headers as a compensating control.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-46148 — 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-2022-46148 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