CVE-2022-46363
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in Apache CXF before versions 3.5.5 and 3.4.10 allows an attacker to perform a remote directory listing or code exfiltration. The vulnerability only applies when the CXFServlet is configured with both the static-resources-list and redirect-query-check attributes. These attributes are not supposed to be used together, and so the vulnerability can only arise if the CXF service is misconfigured.
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 confidenceApache CXF before versions 3.5.5 and 3.4.10 contains a vulnerability when the CXFServlet is configured with both static-resources-list and redirect-query-check attributes together, which is an unsupported configuration. This misconfiguration allows attackers to perform remote directory listings or exfiltrate code from the server.
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< 3.4.10>= 3.5.0, < 3.5.5CVSS 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
- 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 Apache CXF versionInspect the CXF JAR files in your deployment (typically in WEB-INF/lib) or check your dependency management file (pom.xml, build.gradle) for the cxf-core or cxf jar version.Affected if The installed version is less than 3.4.10, or is 3.5.0 through 3.5.4.
-
Locate CXFServlet configurationSearch your deployment descriptor (web.xml) or Spring/Blueprint application context files for a servlet definition of class org.apache.cxf.transport.servlet.CXFServlet.Affected if CXFServlet is configured and in use.
-
Check for static-resources-list attributeIn the CXFServlet servlet configuration, look for a init-param named static-resources-list and note its value.Affected if The static-resources-list init-param is defined in the CXFServlet configuration.
-
Check for redirect-query-check attributeIn the CXFServlet servlet configuration, look for a init-param named redirect-query-check and note its value.Affected if The redirect-query-check init-param is defined in the CXFServlet configuration.
-
Verify vulnerable attribute combinationConfirm whether BOTH static-resources-list AND redirect-query-check init-params are present simultaneously in the same CXFServlet configuration.Affected if Both init-params are defined together in the CXFServlet, which creates the unsupported configuration.
You are affected if you are running a vulnerable CXF version (below 3.4.10 or between 3.5.0-3.5.4) AND have both static-resources-list and redirect-query-check attributes configured together in your CXFServlet.
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 · scoped3.4.103.5.5
Upgrade to Apache CXF version 3.5.5 or 3.4.10 or later. Alternatively, ensure the CXFServlet is not configured with both static-resources-list and redirect-query-check attributes simultaneously.
CXF 3.4.10+ (for 3.4.x branch) or CXF 3.5.5+ (for 3.5.x branch)
- 1. Identify the current Apache CXF version in use by checking project dependencies (Maven pom.xml, Gradle build file, or library manifests)
- 2. Determine which CXF branch is being used (3.4.x or 3.5.x)
- 3. If using CXF 3.4.x (version < 3.4.10): Upgrade to CXF 3.4.10 or later
- 4. If using CXF 3.5.x (version >= 3.5.0 and < 3.5.5): Upgrade to CXF 3.5.5 or later
- 5. Rebuild and redeploy the application
- 6. As a temporary configuration mitigation (until upgrade is possible): Ensure the CXFServlet is NOT configured with both 'static-resources-list' and 'redirect-query-check' attributes simultaneously
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-46363 — 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-2022-46363 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