CVE-2026-32130
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 · uneditedZITADEL is an open source identity management platform. From 2.68.0 to before 3.4.8 and 4.12.2, Zitadel provides a System for Cross-domain Identity Management (SCIM) API to provision users from external providers into Zitadel. Request to the API with URL-encoded path values were correctly routed but would bypass necessary authentication and permission checks. This allowed unauthenticated attackers to retrieve sensitive information such as names, email addresses, phone numbers, addresses, external IDs, and roles. Note that due to additional checks when manipulating data, an attacker could not modify or delete any user data. This vulnerability is fixed in 3.4.8 and 4.12.2.
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 confidenceZITADEL's SCIM API contains an authentication bypass vulnerability where URL-encoded path values bypass necessary authentication and permission checks while still being correctly routed. This allows unauthenticated attackers to read sensitive user PII including names, emails, phone numbers, addresses, external IDs, and roles. Data modification and deletion are blocked by additional checks.
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>= 2.68.0, < 3.4.8>= 4.0.0, < 4.12.2CVSS 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
- 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 if ZITADEL is runningCheck running processes or containers for 'zitadel' or review your deployed services inventory. Look for ZITADEL in your container orchestrator, service mesh, or process list.Affected if ZITADEL is present in the environment
-
Determine installed ZITADEL versionQuery the ZITADEL instance via its API endpoint /debug/version, check the Docker image tag, Helm chart version, or the ZITADEL binary version using 'zitadel version' if CLI access is available.Affected if The installed version falls within >= 2.68.0 and < 3.4.8, OR >= 4.0.0 and < 4.12.2
-
Verify SCIM API is enabledReview ZITADEL configuration files, Helm values.yaml, or environment variables for SCIM-related settings. Check if the SCIM feature flag or endpoint configuration exists and is not explicitly disabled.Affected if SCIM API is enabled in the ZITADEL configuration
-
Assess SCIM API network exposureInspect network policies, API gateway rules, load balancer configurations, or firewall rules to determine if the /scim endpoint is reachable from untrusted networks.Affected if The SCIM endpoint is accessible from networks other than trusted administration networks
If ZITADEL is running with a version in the affected ranges AND SCIM API is enabled AND the endpoint is network-accessible from untrusted sources, the environment is vulnerable to this authentication bypass.
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 · scoped3.4.84.12.2
Upgrade ZITADEL to version 3.4.8, 4.12.2, or later. If immediate patching is not feasible, implement network-level restrictions to limit SCIM API exposure to untrusted networks.
Upgrade to Zitadel 3.4.8 or 4.12.2 (choose the appropriate version based on your current major branch)
- Backup your Zitadel database before performing any upgrade
- Review the Zitadel upgrade guide for your deployment method (Docker, Kubernetes, or binary)
- Stop the running Zitadel instance
- Upgrade Zitadel to version 3.4.8 (if on the 2.x/3.x branch) or version 4.12.2 (if on the 4.x branch)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the Zitadel health endpoint
- Confirm the SCIM endpoint now requires proper authentication by testing with and without credentials
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-32130 — 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-2026-32130 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