CVE-2022-1596
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 · uneditedIncorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource vulnerability in ABB REX640 PCL1, REX640 PCL2, REX640 PCL3 allows an authenticated attacker to launch an attack against the user database file and try to take control of an affected system node.
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 · moderate confidenceThe ABB REX640 protection relay contains an incorrect permission assignment vulnerability where the user database file has improper access controls. An authenticated attacker can exploit this to modify or read the user database, potentially escalating privileges and gaining control of the affected system node.
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<= 1.0.7< 1.1.4< 1.2.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 installed firmware versionAccess the REX640 device via its web interface, HMI, or management software and navigate to the system information or firmware version section. Note the firmware version number and whether it is PCL1, PCL2, or PCL3.Affected if The firmware version is PCL1 <= 1.0.7, PCL2 < 1.1.4, or PCL3 < 1.2.1
-
Locate the user database fileThrough the device's administrative interface or file system access (if available), find the user database file that stores user accounts and credentials. This is typically referenced in system documentation or accessible via the configuration management section.Affected if The user database file exists on the device and is accessible
-
Verify file permissions on the user databaseInspect the access control settings or file permissions on the user database file. Check whether the file has overly permissive access rights that allow authenticated users (beyond administrators) to read or modify the file.Affected if File permissions allow read or write access to non-administrator authenticated users
-
Check for excessive user privilegesReview the user account configurations in the device to determine if standard or limited users have been granted permissions that exceed their intended role, particularly permissions related to file or configuration access.Affected if Non-administrator accounts have been granted elevated permissions beyond their intended role
You are affected if the REX640 firmware version falls within the affected ranges (PCL1 <= 1.0.7, PCL2 < 1.1.4, or PCL3 < 1.2.1) AND the user database file has improper access controls that permit authenticated users to read or modify it.
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 data1.1.41.2.1
Apply vendor-supplied firmware/software updates for the REX640 PCL1/PCL2/PCL3 versions and review file permissions on the user database to ensure proper access controls following least-privilege principles.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-1596 — 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-2022-1596 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