GrafanaApplication
CVE-2023-3128
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 · uneditedGrafana is validating Azure AD accounts based on the email claim. On Azure AD, the profile email field is not unique and can be easily modified. This leads to account takeover and authentication bypass when Azure AD OAuth is configured with a multi-tenant app.
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 confidenceGrafana validates Azure AD OAuth users based solely on the email claim, which is not unique in Azure AD and can be easily modified. An attacker with a multi-tenant Azure AD application can modify their profile email to match another user's email, bypassing authentication and achieving account takeover.
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
GrafanaApplication
>= 6.7.0, < 8.5.27>= 9.2.0, < 9.2.20>= 9.3.0, < 9.3.16>= 9.4.0, < 9.4.13>= 9.5.0, < 9.5.4CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Check Grafana versionRun 'grafana-server --version' or check the admin info API at /api/health or examine the grafana-server binaryAffected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: >= 6.7.0 and < 8.5.27; >= 9.2.0 and < 9.2.20; >= 9.3.0 and < 9.3.16; >= 9.4.0 and < 9.4.13; >= 9.5.0 and < 9.5.4
-
Verify Azure AD OAuth is configuredInspect the Grafana configuration file (grafana.ini) for the [auth.azuread] section, or check environment variables for AUTH_AZUREAD_ settingsAffected if Azure AD OAuth authentication is enabled in the Grafana configuration
-
Identify the OAuth identity claim usedIn grafana.ini under [auth.azuread], look for the 'email_attribute' or 'id_token_email_attribute' setting, or check if 'role_attribute_claim' uses email instead of oidAffected if The configuration uses the email claim for user identification without additional validation against the immutable 'oid' claim, or explicitly maps email as the primary identifier
Grafana is vulnerable if it runs an affected version AND has Azure AD OAuth enabled while relying on the email claim (which can be spoofed) rather than the immutable oid claim for user identity verification.
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 · scoped8.5.279.2.209.3.16
Upgrade Grafana to the patched version and configure Azure AD OAuth to use the immutable tenant-specific unique identifier claim (oid) instead of email for user identification, or restrict multi-tenant app configuration.
8.5.27 / 9.2.20 / 9.3.16 / 9.4.13 or later
- Upgrade Grafana to version 8.5.27, 9.2.20, 9.3.16, or 9.4.13 (or later in each respective major branch)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Grafana
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-3128 — 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-2023-3128 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