CVE-2022-1254
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 URL redirection vulnerability in Skyhigh SWG in main releases 10.x prior to 10.2.9, 9.x prior to 9.2.20, 8.x prior to 8.2.27, and 7.x prior to 7.8.2.31, and controlled release 11.x prior to 11.1.3 allows a remote attacker to redirect a user to a malicious website controlled by the attacker. This is possible because SWG incorrectly creates a HTTP redirect response when a user clicks a carefully constructed URL. Following the redirect response, the new request is still filtered by the SWG policy.
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 confidenceSkyhigh Secure Web Gateway contains an open redirect vulnerability where specially crafted URLs cause the SWG to incorrectly generate HTTP 302 redirect responses to attacker-controlled domains. Although redirected requests continue to be filtered by SWG policy, the initial redirect can socially engineer users who trust the original SWG-protected domain.
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>= 7.0.0, < 7.8.2.31>= 8.0.0, < 8.2.27>= 9.0.0, < 9.2.20>= 10.0.0, < 10.2.9>= 11.0.0, < 11.1.3CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 if McAfee or Skyhigh Web Gateway is runningCheck running processes for 'mwg' or 'webgateway' daemons, or scan network ports 8080, 8443 for the admin UI or proxy serviceAffected if The product is present and running as a proxy/gateway service
-
Locate the product version via admin UIAccess the web admin interface (typically https://<gateway-ip>:8443) and navigate to 'Help > About' or 'System > Status' to view the version numberAffected if The displayed version falls within any of the affected ranges: 7.0.0-7.8.2.30, 8.0.0-8.2.26, 9.0.0-9.2.19, 10.0.0-10.2.8, or 11.0.0-11.1.2
-
Locate the product version via command lineOn the appliance console, run: 'mwg-relog -v' or 'cat /opt/mwg/etc/version' (path may vary by installation)Affected if The returned version matches any of the affected ranges listed above
-
Confirm redirect functionality is in useVerify the SWG is configured as a proxy or transparent proxy handling HTTP/HTTPS traffic - check proxy listening ports (typically 8080, 3128) and routing/iptables rulesAffected if The gateway is actively proxying or redirecting user traffic (this is the default operational mode for SWG)
You are affected if McAfee Web Gateway or Skyhigh Secure Web Gateway is installed and the running version is lower than 7.8.2.31, 8.2.27, 9.2.20, 10.2.9, or 11.1.3 depending on your release branch.
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.
dbcve · scoped7.8.2.318.2.279.2.20
Apply vendor-supplied patches: upgrade to 10.2.9+, 9.2.20+, 8.2.27+, 7.8.2.31+, or 11.1.3+ depending on your release branch.
Upgrade to version 7.8.2.31 or later (7.x), 8.2.27 or later (8.x), 9.2.20 or later (9.x), or 10.2.9 or later (10.x)
- 1. Identify the current version of McAfee/Skyhigh Web Gateway installed in your environment
- 2. Determine which major version branch you are running (7.x, 8.x, 9.x, or 10.x)
- 3. Download the appropriate fixed version from the McAfee Knowledge Center (kc.mcafee.com) or your authorized download channel
- 4. Review the upgrade guide and release notes for your specific version path
- 5. Create a backup of the current configuration
- 6. Perform the upgrade during a planned maintenance window
- 7. Verify the upgrade was successful and the version number matches the fixed release
- 8. Test that the redirect functionality now properly validates URLs and does not allow arbitrary external redirects
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-1254 — 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-2022-1254 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