CVE Tools

CVE-2021-32747

Custom variable protection and blacklists can be circumvented

No known exploitation. EPSS puts it in the 71st percentile. A vendor fix is available.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD, BDU

What to do

The vendor has published a fix. Version details are below where the sources state them.

What it is

From the CVE record

Icinga Web 2 is an open source monitoring web interface, framework, and command-line interface. A vulnerability in which custom variables are exposed to unauthorized users exists between versions 2.0.0 and 2.8.2. Custom variables are user-defined keys and values on configuration objects in Icinga 2. These are commonly used to reference secrets in other configurations such as check commands to be able to authenticate with a service being checked. Icinga Web 2 displays these custom variables to logged in users with access to said hosts or services. In order to protect the secrets from being visible to anyone, it's possible to setup protection rules and blacklists in a user's role. Protection rules result in `***` being shown instead of the original value, the key will remain. Backlists will hide a custom variable entirely from the user. Besides using the UI, custom variables can also be accessed differently by using an undocumented URL parameter. By adding a parameter to the affected routes, Icinga Web 2 will show these columns additionally in the respective list. This parameter is also respected when exporting to JSON or CSV. Protection rules and blacklists however have no effect in this case. Custom variables are shown as-is in the result. The issue has been fixed in the 2.9.0, 2.8.3, and 2.7.5 releases. As a workaround, one may set up a restriction to hide hosts and services with the custom variable in question.

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS71st
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

No public exploit or proof of concept found in the sources we track.

EPSS

1.4% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 71st percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

5 events over 1228 days, from the signal feeds we watch.

  1. Patch availablerecord updated
  2. Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Scored 5.3 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
  • Attack Complexity HighRequires specific conditions like a race condition or non-default configuration
  • Privileges Required LowRequires basic user-level privileges
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope UnchangedImpact is limited to the vulnerable component itself

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
  • Integrity NoneNo integrity impact
  • Availability NoneNo availability impact

Weaknesses

ATT&CK techniques

Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Icingaweb2, not every advisory.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store