VulnerabilityPublished 21 Sep 2022Updated 27 May 2025

CVE-2022-41247: Jenkins BigPanda Notifier Plugin · CWE-522

Affects Jenkins BigPanda Notifier PluginSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 1.4.1 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.4.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 21 Sep 2022
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade Jenkins BigPanda Notifier Plugin to 1.4.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Jenkins project Jenkins BigPanda Notifier Plugin	Affected <1.4.1 <1.4.1	Fixed in 1.4.1

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately audit access controls on Jenkins controllers to ensure that only trusted administrators have file system access. Restricting access to the Jenkins home directory and configuration files is critical. Organizations should upgrade the Jenkins BigPanda Notifier Plugin to the latest version if a patched release is available from the Jenkins project or BigPanda. Additionally, rotate the BigPanda API keys used by Jenkins to invalidate any potentially exposed credentials. Implement monitoring and alerting for unusual access patterns to the Jenkins controller file system and for suspicious API activity in BigPanda. Employ secrets management solutions that avoid storing API keys in plaintext configuration files. Finally, conduct regular security reviews of Jenkins plugins and configurations to detect similar issues proactively.

Description

Jenkins BigPanda Notifier Plugin 1.4.0 and earlier stores the BigPanda API key unencrypted in its global configuration file on the Jenkins controller where they can be viewed by users with access to the Jenkins controller file system.

Impact

For European organizations using Jenkins with the BigPanda Notifier Plugin, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized disclosure of the BigPanda API key if an attacker gains access to the Jenkins controller file system. This could compromise incident management workflows by allowing attackers to view sensitive alert data or inject misleading alerts, potentially delaying or disrupting incident response. While the vulnerability does not directly compromise Jenkins or the underlying infrastructure, it weakens the security posture of the incident management process. Organizations in regulated sectors such as finance, healthcare, or critical infrastructure in Europe could face compliance risks if incident data confidentiality is breached. Additionally, disruption or manipulation of alerting could increase the risk of undetected security incidents or operational outages. The medium severity and requirement for some privilege on the Jenkins controller mean that the threat is more relevant in environments where Jenkins access controls are weak or where attackers have already gained some foothold.

CWE-522Insufficiently Protected Credentials (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product transmits or stores authentication credentials, but it uses an insecure method that is susceptible to unauthorized interception and/or retrieval.
Architecture and Design
Use an appropriate security mechanism to protect the credentials.
Architecture and Design
Make appropriate use of cryptography to protect the credentials.
Implementation
Use industry standards to protect the credentials (e.g. LDAP, keystore, etc.).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V2.10.3 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Session Sidejacking (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Key Theft (opens in a new tab)
Password Recovery Exploitation (opens in a new tab)
Kerberoasting (opens in a new tab)
Modify Existing Service (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

jenkins.io/security/advisory/2022-09-21/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Jul 2025, 02:40 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-522

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats