CVE-2022-48583
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 command injection vulnerability exists in the dashboard scheduler feature of the ScienceLogic SL1 that takes unsanitized user‐controlled input and passes it directly to a shell command. This allows for the injection of arbitrary commands to the underlying operating system.
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 command injection vulnerability exists in the dashboard scheduler feature of ScienceLogic SL1 where unsanitized user-controlled input is directly passed to a shell command, allowing attackers to inject and execute arbitrary OS commands.
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<= 11.1.2CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 if ScienceLogic SL1 is presentLook for SL1 processes running on the system (e.g., 'ps aux | grep -i science' or 'ps aux | grep -i sl1'), or check for common SL1 installation directories such as /opt/em7, /opt/scienceLogic, or /usr/local/scienceLogicAffected if SL1 processes or installation directories are found on the system
-
Determine the installed SL1 versionCheck the SL1 version by viewing the version file typically located at /opt/em7/version or /opt/scienceLogic/version, or run 'rpm -q ScienceLogic' if installed via RPMAffected if The installed version is 11.1.2 or any earlier version (anything <= 11.1.2)
-
Verify the dashboard scheduler feature is configuredLook for dashboard scheduler configuration files in /opt/em7/admin or /opt/em7/etc, or check the SL1 database for scheduler-related tables (look for 'dashboard' and 'scheduler' in table names)Affected if The dashboard scheduler feature has been configured or used on the system
The system is affected if ScienceLogic SL1 version 11.1.2 or earlier is installed and the dashboard scheduler feature has been configured, as this combination allows unsanitized user input to be passed to shell commands.
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 proper input validation and sanitization, and refactor code to avoid direct shell command execution—use parameterized commands or safe API alternatives instead of passing user input to shell functions.
- 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-2022-48583 — 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-2022-48583 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