[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$fV9yyEEy0e8YKKfLEJcHC26nCz260TMR6woyRgM2RSLo":3,"g5a-risk:CVE-2022-46169":142},{"success":4,"data":5,"meta":139},true,{"cveId":6,"title":7,"description":8,"shortDescription":9,"publishedDate":10,"lastModified":11,"cvssScore":12,"cvssVector":13,"cvssMetrics":14,"epssScore":36,"epssPercentile":27,"epssTimeSeries":37,"severity":38,"affectedProducts":39,"affectedProductsCount":44,"references":45,"referencesCount":76,"weaknesses":77,"weaknessesCount":98,"isActivelyExploited":4,"cisaInfo":99,"otxData":27,"relatedBlogPosts":101,"seoMetadata":102,"configurations":127,"relatedVendorCves":137,"notableEvents":138},"CVE-2022-46169","What is CVE-2022-46169?","Cacti is an open source platform which provides a robust and extensible operational monitoring and fault management framework for users. In affected versions a command injection vulnerability allows an unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary code on a server running Cacti, if a specific data source was selected for any monitored device. The vulnerability resides in the `remote_agent.php` file. This file can be accessed without authentication. This function retrieves the IP address of the client via `get_client_addr` and resolves this IP address to the corresponding hostname via `gethostbyaddr`. After this, it is verified that an entry within the `poller` table exists, where the hostname corresponds to the resolved hostname. If such an entry was found, the function returns `true` and the client is authorized. This authorization can be bypassed due to the implementation of the `get_client_addr` function. The function is defined in the file `lib\u002Ffunctions.php` and checks serval `$_SERVER` variables to determine the IP address of the client. The variables beginning with `HTTP_` can be arbitrarily set by an attacker. Since there is a default entry in the `poller` table with the hostname of the server running Cacti, an attacker can bypass the authentication e.g. by providing the header `Forwarded-For: `. This way the function `get_client_addr` returns the IP address of the server running Cacti. The following call to `gethostbyaddr` will resolve this IP address to the hostname of the server, which will pass the `poller` hostname check because of the default entry. After the authorization of the `remote_agent.php` file is bypassed, an attacker can trigger different actions. One of these actions is called `polldata`. The called function `poll_for_data` retrieves a few request parameters and loads the corresponding `poller_item` entries from the database. If the `action` of a `poller_item` equals `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP`, the function `proc_open` is used to execute a PHP script. The attacker-controlled parameter `$poller_id` is retrieved via the function `get_nfilter_request_var`, which allows arbitrary strings. This variable is later inserted into the string passed to `proc_open`, which leads to a command injection vulnerability. By e.g. providing the `poller_id=;id` the `id` command is executed. In order to reach the vulnerable call, the attacker must provide a `host_id` and `local_data_id`, where the `action` of the corresponding `poller_item` is set to `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP`. Both of these ids (`host_id` and `local_data_id`) can easily be bruteforced. The only requirement is that a `poller_item` with an `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP` action exists. This is very likely on a productive instance because this action is added by some predefined templates like `Device - Uptime` or `Device - Polling Time`.\n\nThis command injection vulnerability allows an unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary commands if a `poller_item` with the `action` type `POLLER_ACTION_SCRIPT_PHP` (`2`) is configured. The authorization bypass should be prevented by not allowing an attacker to make `get_client_addr` (file `lib\u002Ffunctions.php`) return an arbitrary IP address. This could be done by not honoring the `HTTP_...` `$_SERVER` variables. If these should be kept for compatibility reasons it should at least be prevented to fake the IP address of the server running Cacti. This vulnerability has been addressed in both the 1.2.x and 1.3.x release branches with `1.2.23` being the first release containing the patch.","Cacti is an open source platform which provides a robust and extensible operational monitoring and fault management framework for users. In affected versions...","2022-12-05T21:15:10.527","2025-10-24T14:47:01.117",9.8,"CVSS:3.1\u002FAV:N\u002FAC:L\u002FPR:N\u002FUI:N\u002FS:U\u002FC:H\u002FI:H\u002FA:H",{"CVSSMetricV31":15,"CVSSMetricV30":34,"CVSSMetricV2":35,"CVSSMetricV40":27},[16,30],{"Source":17,"Type":18,"CVSSData":19,"ExploitabilityScore":28,"ImpactScore":29},"security-advisories@github.com","Secondary",{"Version":20,"VectorString":13,"AttackVector":21,"AttackComplexity":22,"PrivilegesRequired":23,"UserInteraction":23,"Scope":24,"ConfidentialityImpact":25,"IntegrityImpact":25,"AvailabilityImpact":25,"BaseScore":12,"BaseSeverity":26,"ExploitCodeMaturity":27,"RemediationLevel":27,"ReportConfidence":27,"TemporalScore":27,"TemporalSeverity":27,"ConfidentialityRequirement":27,"IntegrityRequirement":27,"AvailabilityRequirement":27,"ModifiedAttackVector":27,"ModifiedAttackComplexity":27,"ModifiedPrivilegesRequired":27,"ModifiedUserInteraction":27,"ModifiedScope":27,"ModifiedConfidentialityImpact":27,"ModifiedIntegrityImpact":27,"ModifiedAvailabilityImpact":27,"EnvironmentalScore":27,"EnvironmentalSeverity":27},"3.1","NETWORK","LOW","NONE","UNCHANGED","HIGH","CRITICAL",null,3.9,5.9,{"Source":31,"Type":32,"CVSSData":33,"ExploitabilityScore":28,"ImpactScore":29},"nvd@nist.gov","Primary",{"Version":20,"VectorString":13,"AttackVector":21,"AttackComplexity":22,"PrivilegesRequired":23,"UserInteraction":23,"Scope":24,"ConfidentialityImpact":25,"IntegrityImpact":25,"AvailabilityImpact":25,"BaseScore":12,"BaseSeverity":26,"ExploitCodeMaturity":27,"RemediationLevel":27,"ReportConfidence":27,"TemporalScore":27,"TemporalSeverity":27,"ConfidentialityRequirement":27,"IntegrityRequirement":27,"AvailabilityRequirement":27,"ModifiedAttackVector":27,"ModifiedAttackComplexity":27,"ModifiedPrivilegesRequired":27,"ModifiedUserInteraction":27,"ModifiedScope":27,"ModifiedConfidentialityImpact":27,"ModifiedIntegrityImpact":27,"ModifiedAvailabilityImpact":27,"EnvironmentalScore":27,"EnvironmentalSeverity":27},[],[],0.99826,[36,36,36,36,36,36,36],"Critical",[40],{"vendor":41,"product":41,"version":42,"criteria":43,"vulnerable":4},"cacti","*","cpe:2.3:a:cacti:cacti:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",1,[46,52,55,58,63,65,67,69,71],{"url":47,"source":48,"tags":49},"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FCacti\u002Fcacti\u002Fcommit\u002F7f0e16312dd5ce20f93744ef8b9c3b0f1ece2216","GitHub",[50,51],"Patch","Third Party Advisory",{"url":53,"source":48,"tags":54},"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FCacti\u002Fcacti\u002Fcommit\u002Fa8d59e8fa5f0054aa9c6981b1cbe30ef0e2a0ec9",[50,51],{"url":56,"source":48,"tags":57},"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FCacti\u002Fcacti\u002Fcommit\u002Fb43f13ae7f1e6bfe4e8e56a80a7cd867cf2db52b",[50,51],{"url":59,"source":48,"tags":60},"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FCacti\u002Fcacti\u002Fsecurity\u002Fadvisories\u002FGHSA-6p93-p743-35gf",[61,62,50,51],"Exploit","Mitigation",{"url":47,"source":48,"tags":64},[50,51],{"url":53,"source":48,"tags":66},[50,51],{"url":56,"source":48,"tags":68},[50,51],{"url":59,"source":48,"tags":70},[61,62,50,51],{"url":72,"source":73,"tags":74},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.cisa.gov\u002Fknown-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2022-46169","CISA",[75],"US Government Resource",9,[78,86,93],{"id":79,"name":80,"description":81,"extendedDescription":82,"status":83,"abstraction":84,"structure":85},"CWE-74","Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection')","The product constructs all or part of a command, data structure, or record using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify how it is parsed or interpreted when it is sent to a downstream component.","Software or other automated logic has certain assumptions about what constitutes data and control respectively. It is the lack of verification of these assumptions for user-controlled input that leads to injection problems. Injection problems encompass a wide variety of issues -- all mitigated in very different ways and usually attempted in order to alter the control flow of the process. For this reason, the most effective way to discuss these weaknesses is to note the distinct features that classify them as injection weaknesses. The most important issue to note is that all injection problems share one thing in common -- i.e., they allow for the injection of control plane data into the user-controlled data plane. This means that the execution of the process may be altered by sending code in through legitimate data channels, using no other mechanism. While buffer overflows, and many other flaws, involve the use of some further issue to gain execution, injection problems need only for the data to be parsed.","Incomplete","Class","Simple",{"id":87,"name":88,"description":89,"extendedDescription":90,"status":91,"abstraction":92,"structure":85},"CWE-78","Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')","The product constructs all or part of an OS command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended OS command when it is sent to a downstream component.","This weakness can lead to a vulnerability in environments in which the attacker does not have direct access to the operating system, such as in web applications. Alternately, if the weakness occurs in a privileged program, it could allow the attacker to specify commands that normally would not be accessible, or to call alternate commands with privileges that the attacker does not have. The problem is exacerbated if the compromised process does not follow the principle of least privilege, because the attacker-controlled commands may run with special system privileges that increases the amount of damage.\nThere are at least two subtypes of OS command injection:\nFrom a weakness standpoint, these variants represent distinct programmer errors. In the first variant, the programmer clearly intends that input from untrusted parties will be part of the arguments in the command to be executed. In the second variant, the programmer does not intend for the command to be accessible to any untrusted party, but the programmer probably has not accounted for alternate ways in which malicious attackers can provide input.","Stable","Base",{"id":94,"name":95,"description":96,"extendedDescription":97,"status":83,"abstraction":84,"structure":85},"CWE-863","Incorrect Authorization","The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check. This allows attackers to bypass intended access restrictions.","Assuming a user with a given identity, authorization is the process of determining whether that user can access a given resource, based on the user's privileges and any permissions or other access-control specifications that apply to the resource.\nWhen access control checks are incorrectly applied, users are able to access data or perform actions that they should not be allowed to perform. This can lead to a wide range of problems, including information exposures, denial of service, and arbitrary code execution.",3,{"shortDescription":100,"requiredAction":100,"vulnerabilityName":100,"dateAdded":27},"",[],{"title":103,"metaDescription":104,"keywords":105,"canonicalUrl":106,"structuredData":107},"What is CVE-2022-46169? Vulnerability Analysis | Security Advisory | EdgeProtect","Comprehensive analysis of CVE-2022-46169, a critical severity cyber security vulnerability from 2022. High exploit probability (99.8%). Cacti is an open sour...","CVE-2022-46169, CVE-2022-46169 vulnerability, CVE-2022-46169 security, critical severity vulnerability, cybersecurity, vulnerability analysis, security advisory, CVE database, threat intelligence, security research, vulnerability assessment, cyber threats, 2022, CVSS score, exploit, patch, remediation, cacti security, cacti vulnerability, high risk vulnerability, actively exploited, exploit available","\u002Fwhat-is\u002Fcve-2022-46169",{"@context":108,"@type":109,"headline":103,"description":104,"datePublished":10,"dateModified":11,"author":110,"publisher":114,"about":118,"mainEntityOfPage":122,"articleSection":125,"keywords":126},"https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org","TechArticle",{"@type":111,"name":112,"url":113},"Organization","EdgeProtect","https:\u002F\u002Fedgeprotect.io",{"@type":111,"name":112,"url":113,"logo":115},{"@type":116,"url":117},"ImageObject","https:\u002F\u002Fedgeprotect.io\u002Fimg\u002Flogos\u002Fedgeprotect-logo-512.png",{"@type":119,"name":6,"description":120,"additionalType":121},"Thing","Cybersecurity Vulnerability","https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org\u002FSoftwareBug",{"@type":123,"@id":124},"WebPage","https:\u002F\u002Fedgeprotect.io\u002Fwhat-is\u002Fcve-2022-46169","Cybersecurity","CVE-2022-46169, CVE-2022-46169 vulnerability, CVE-2022-46169 security, critical severity vulnerability, cybersecurity, vulnerability analysis, security advisory, CVE database, threat intelligence, security research",[128],{"Operator":27,"Negate":27,"Nodes":129},[130],{"Operator":131,"Negate":132,"CPEMatch":133},"OR",false,[134],{"Vulnerable":4,"Criteria":43,"MatchCriteriaID":135,"VersionStartExcluding":27,"VersionStartIncluding":27,"VersionEndExcluding":136,"VersionEndIncluding":27},"B252EEC1-25BE-428B-96CA-22A0E812D3BA","1.2.23",[],[],{"lastModified":11,"cacheTime":140,"version":141},1793228658611,"2.0",{"score":143,"band":38,"action":144,"scoredAt":145},90,"Emergency patch","2026-10-28T06:55:47.793569+00:00"]