ZitadelApplication

CVE-2023-44399

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2023-10-10
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 2.37.2 or later.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
ZITADEL provides identity infrastructure. In versions 2.37.2 and prior, ZITADEL administrators can enable a setting called "Ignoring unknown usernames" which helps mitigate attacks that try to guess/enumerate usernames. While this settings was properly working during the authentication process it did not work correctly on the password reset flow. This meant that even if this feature was active that an attacker could use the password reset function to verify if an account exist within ZITADEL. This bug has been patched in versions 2.37.3 and 2.38.0. No known workarounds are available.

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 confidence

ZITADEL's 'Ignoring unknown usernames' setting, intended to prevent username enumeration attacks, was not properly enforced in the password reset flow. This allowed attackers to verify account existence by abusing the password reset functionality, even when the mitigation feature was enabled during authentication.

MitigationUpgrade to ZITADEL version 2.37.3 or 2.38.0 to patch this vulnerability; no workarounds are available.

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
ZitadelApplication
Affected:<= 2.37.2

CVSS 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
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check your ZITADEL version
    Query the ZITADEL instance version endpoint or check the running container/service version
    Affected if Running version 2.37.2 or lower (versions prior to 2.37.3 or 2.38.0)
  2. Verify if Ignoring unknown usernames is enabled in auth settings
    Check the ZITADEL authentication policy configuration for the 'Ignore unknown usernames' setting - this is typically found in the Console under Login Policy or via the API
    Affected if The setting is enabled (toggle ON) in authentication but was not applied to the password reset flow
  3. Confirm password reset endpoint is exposed
    Test access to the password reset endpoint (typically /ui/login/password reset or /password reset API) without authentication to see if it returns different responses for existing vs non-existing usernames
    Affected if The endpoint responds differently for known usernames versus unknown usernames when the 'Ignoring unknown usernames' setting is enabled elsewhere in the system

You are affected if running ZITADEL version 2.37.2 or lower and the password reset flow reveals account existence despite having 'Ignoring unknown usernames' enabled in your authentication policy.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 2.37.2
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to ZITADEL version 2.37.3 or 2.38.0 to patch this vulnerability; no workarounds are available.

Recommended fix High confidence

2.38.0 (or 2.37.3)

  1. Upgrade ZITADEL to version 2.37.3 or 2.38.0 to apply the security patch that fixes the password reset flow username enumeration vulnerability

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Zitadel Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-44399 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-44399 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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