CVE-2022-0910
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 · uneditedA downgrade from two-factor authentication to one-factor authentication vulnerability in the CGI program of Zyxel USG/ZyWALL series firmware versions 4.32 through 4.71, USG FLEX series firmware versions 4.50 through 5.21, ATP series firmware versions 4.32 through 5.21, and VPN series firmware versions 4.32 through 5.21, that could allow an authenticated attacker to bypass the second authentication phase to connect the IPsec VPN server even though the two-factor authentication (2FA) was enabled.
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 confidenceAn authenticated attacker can force the Zyxel VPN CGI program to downgrade from two-factor authentication to single-factor authentication, allowing them to bypass the second authentication phase when connecting to the IPsec VPN server even when 2FA is enabled on the device.
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>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21>= 4.32, <= 5.21CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/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 the device modelAccess the device admin interface or use CLI command 'show system-info' to confirm the model name (Vpn100, Vpn1000, Vpn300, Vpn50, Atp100, Atp100w, Atp200, or Atp500)Affected if Device model is one of: Vpn100, Vpn1000, Vpn300, Vpn50, Atp100, Atp100w, Atp200, Atp500
-
Check firmware versionAccess the device admin interface or use CLI command 'show firmware-version' to obtain the current firmware versionAffected if Firmware version is >= 4.32 and <= 5.21
-
Verify IPsec VPN is configuredCheck the VPN configuration through the admin interface or use CLI command 'show ipsec configuration' to determine if IPsec VPN is enabledAffected if IPsec VPN is configured and active on the device
-
Confirm 2FA is enabled for IPsec VPNNavigate to VPN settings in the admin interface or use CLI command 'show vpn authentication' to verify two-factor authentication settings for IPsec VPN connectionsAffected if Two-factor authentication is enabled for IPsec VPN (the vulnerability allows bypassing this 2FA)
Device is affected if it is one of the listed models, runs firmware 4.32-5.21, has IPsec VPN configured, and has 2FA enabled for IPsec connections.
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.
From vendor dataApply vendor-supplied firmware patches for affected versions (USG/ZyWALL 4.72+, USG FLEX 5.22+, ATP 5.22+, VPN 5.22+) and verify that 2FA remains enforced for IPsec VPN connections after the update.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-0910 — 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-2022-0910 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