CVE-2026-57522: Bitwarden Server JSON Injection in Event Integrations
Bitwarden Server versions before 2026.5.0 allow authenticated users to inject malicious JSON data into event integration outputs by manipulating their own display name. When an organization has configured integrations (such as webhooks to SIEM, Slack, Teams, or Datadog) that include user information in the payload, an attacker can set their display name to contain JSON special characters. This causes the server to render those characters into the integration payload without properly escaping them, allowing the attacker to insert fake data fields that appear legitimate to downstream systems. The vulnerability requires an authenticated account and knowledge that event integrations are in use, limiting its scope to internal threat actors or compromised user accounts.
Source data · NVD / CISA · public domain
- CVSS
- 3.1 · 3.5 LOW · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
- Weaknesses (CWE)
- CWE-74
- Affected products
- 1 configuration(s)
- Published / Modified
- 2026-06-25 / 2026-07-14
NVD description (verbatim)
Bitwarden Server before 2026.5.0 contains a JSON injection vulnerability in IntegrationTemplateProcessor.ReplaceTokens(), which substitutes user-controlled values into event-integration templates without JSON encoding. When an organization has configured an event integration whose template references a user-controlled token (such as #ActingUserName# or #UserName#, populated from a member's display name), an authenticated member can set their display name to JSON metacharacters and inject arbitrary key-value pairs into the rendered payloads delivered to webhook, SIEM, Slack, Teams, or Datadog endpoints, making injected fields indistinguishable from legitimate template output.
5 reference(s) · View on NVD →
SEC.co analysis · AI-assisted, reviewed against source
Technical summary
CVE-2026-57522 is a JSON injection vulnerability in the IntegrationTemplateProcessor.ReplaceTokens() method within Bitwarden Server. The flaw stems from insufficient output encoding when substituting user-controlled tokens (such as #ActingUserName# and #UserName#, derived from member display names) into event-integration templates. An authenticated user can inject JSON metacharacters into their display name field; during event integration payload construction, these characters are not JSON-escaped before being inserted into the rendered output. This permits an attacker to inject arbitrary key-value pairs into webhook, SIEM, Slack, Teams, and Datadog payloads, making injected fields indistinguishable from legitimate template data. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-74 (Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component) and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 3.5 with low severity.
Business impact
The primary business impact centers on data integrity and trust in event integration outputs. Organizations relying on event integrations for audit logging, threat detection, or incident response may receive poisoned payloads containing attacker-injected fields. While the vulnerability does not permit data exfiltration or system compromise, injected false fields could mislead security operations teams, trigger false alerts in SIEM systems, or corrupt audit trails used for compliance reporting. In environments where downstream systems automatically act upon integration payloads, injected data could theoretically influence automation decisions. The impact is most significant for organizations with strict audit requirements or those using integrations as primary controls for threat detection.
Affected systems
Bitwarden Server versions prior to 2026.5.0 are affected. The vulnerability requires that an organization has actively configured at least one event integration (webhook, SIEM connector, Slack, Teams, or Datadog) and that the integration template references at least one user-controlled token (typically #ActingUserName# or #UserName#). Self-hosted Bitwarden Server deployments are directly impacted; cloud-hosted instances depend on Bitwarden's own patch schedule. The vulnerability does not affect clients (browser extensions, desktop, mobile) or Bitwarden Vault, only the server-side integration processor.
Exploitability
Exploitation requires valid authentication as an organization member, making this an insider threat or compromised-account scenario. No network interaction bypass is possible, and the attacker must have the ability to modify their own display name—a permission typically available to all authenticated users. The attacker must also know or infer that event integrations are configured; this information may be visible to organization administrators or discoverable through administrative interfaces. The vulnerability is not included in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, suggesting no active wild exploitation has been reported as of the publication date. Overall, exploitability is low in environments with strong user access controls and high in organizations where compromised accounts or malicious insiders are a concern.
Remediation
Organizations should immediately upgrade Bitwarden Server to version 2026.5.0 or later, which resolves the vulnerability by implementing proper JSON encoding in the IntegrationTemplateProcessor.ReplaceTokens() method. Prior to upgrading, consider disabling event integrations if feasible, or restricting display name changes to administrators. Review audit logs and integration payloads delivered since the last known safe version for signs of injected data or anomalous fields. Verify that downstream systems (SIEM, Slack, Teams, Datadog) have not ingested poisoned events that could affect detection or response workflows.
Patch guidance
Upgrade to Bitwarden Server 2026.5.0 or later. Verify the upgrade by checking the server version in the Bitwarden administration interface. No configuration changes are required post-patch; existing event integrations will function normally with proper JSON encoding applied. If your deployment uses automated update mechanisms, ensure that the update has completed successfully before resuming normal operations. Bitwarden maintains release notes at their official documentation site; verify the patch version against the official advisory to confirm it includes this fix.
Detection guidance
Monitor Bitwarden Server logs for authentication events followed by display name modification attempts, particularly by non-administrative accounts. Inspect event integration payloads (logs, webhook captures, SIEM ingestion) for unexpected JSON fields or values that do not match your organization's defined template schema. Anomalous fields may contain special characters (braces, quotes, backslashes) that suggest injection attempts. SIEM rules can flag payloads where the number of fields exceeds the expected count or where field names deviate from the template definition. Query Bitwarden's audit log for display name changes containing JSON metacharacters (such as {, }, ", \, etc.). Review webhook delivery logs and error messages from downstream integrations for signs of malformed or rejected payloads caused by injection attempts.
Why prioritize this
Despite its low CVSS score (3.5), this vulnerability warrants attention for organizations using event integrations as part of their security monitoring or compliance infrastructure. The integrity of audit logs and detection outputs is fundamental to effective incident response. Insider threats are a persistent security concern, and this flaw provides a direct mechanism for a compromised user to poison audit trails or inject false signals into downstream systems. Organizations in regulated industries (finance, healthcare, government) where audit integrity is mandated by regulation should prioritize patching. However, organizations without active event integrations face minimal risk and may defer patching to a standard maintenance window. This is a medium-priority patch for most environments but high-priority for security-critical deployments.
Risk score, explained
The CVSS 3.1 score of 3.5 reflects the low intrinsic severity: the vulnerability requires authentication (raising the attack complexity), affects only event integration payloads (limiting scope), and causes only integrity impact (no confidentiality or availability loss). However, the score does not capture the contextual risk in environments where event integrations are critical to security operations or audit compliance. Organizations should supplement the base CVSS score with internal risk assessment factoring in their reliance on Bitwarden integrations, the sensitivity of their audit logs, and their exposure to insider threats or account compromise.
Frequently asked questions
Can this vulnerability allow an attacker to exfiltrate data from Bitwarden or downstream systems?
No. The vulnerability permits injection of arbitrary fields into integration payloads but does not enable data exfiltration from Bitwarden itself. Injected fields are constrained to the rendered payload structure and do not provide access to vault data, secrets, or other sensitive information. The attacker can only manipulate data they can control (their own display name).
Do we need to rotate user credentials or change webhook URLs due to this vulnerability?
Credential rotation is not necessary solely due to this vulnerability, as the flaw does not compromise authentication or authorization. However, review your audit logs and integration delivery logs to confirm whether any suspicious payloads were delivered. If you suspect account compromise, rotate credentials for those specific accounts as part of your standard response procedure. Webhook URLs do not need to be changed unless they have been exposed through other means.
We use Bitwarden in a single-user or very small team environment. Is this a risk?
The risk is significantly lower in small teams with high trust and limited administrative delegation. However, the vulnerability can still be exploited if an account is compromised by phishing, malware, or credential theft. Even in small environments, upgrade to 2026.5.0 when feasible, as the patch is straightforward and mitigates the risk entirely.
What if we have already received injected payloads before patching?
Review your SIEM, Slack, Teams, and Datadog logs for any anomalous entries or unexpected fields that correlate with the timing of display name changes. Look for payloads containing JSON metacharacters or extra fields not defined in your integration template. If found, investigate whether those fields triggered any alerts or automation. Update your alerting rules and dashboards to filter out or flag such anomalies. After patching, continue monitoring for a period to ensure injection attempts cease.
This analysis is provided for informational purposes and is based on the CVE record and vendor advisory available as of the publication date. Readers should verify patch availability and applicability in their environment by consulting Bitwarden's official security advisory and release notes. CVSS scores and severity ratings represent the intrinsic vulnerability only and should be combined with internal risk assessment. No exploit code or weaponizable proof-of-concept is provided. Organizations should test patches in a non-production environment before deployment in production. This vulnerability does not appear in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog as of the date of publication, but status may change. SEC.co does not warrant the completeness or accuracy of this analysis and recommends consulting official vendor sources for definitive guidance. Source: NVD (public-domain), retrieved 2026-08-04. Analysis generated by SEC.co (claude-haiku-4-5).
Related vulnerabilities
- CVE-2026-11511LOWBolt CMS HTML Injection Vulnerability – Unsupported Software Risk
- CVE-2026-12812LOWRadware Cyber Controller HTML Injection Vulnerability – Patch Guidance
- CVE-2025-27511HIGHGeoServer DB2 JNDI Injection Remote Code Execution
- CVE-2026-10060MEDIUMTRENDnet TEW-432BRP Command Injection—End-of-Life Router Vulnerability
- CVE-2026-10061MEDIUMTRENDnet TEW-432BRP Command Injection Vulnerability – Remediation via Replacement
- CVE-2026-10110HIGHSQL Injection in code-projects Student Details Management System 1.0
- CVE-2026-10111HIGHSQL Injection in sambitraj STUDENT-MANAGEMENT-SYSTEM 1.0 Login
- CVE-2026-10127MEDIUMEdimax BR-6478AC Command Injection in Firmware 1.23