CVE-2022-1666
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 · uneditedThe default password for the web application’s root user (the vendor’s private account) was weak and the MD5 hash was used to crack the password using a widely available open-source tool.
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 confidenceThe web application's root account (vendor's private account) used a weak default password that was stored using the insecure MD5 hashing algorithm. Attackers were able to crack this password hash using a publicly available open-source tool, potentially gaining full administrative access.
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>= 1.23.0, < 1.23.21>= 1.24.0, < 1.24.8>= 1.25.0, < 1.25.3CVSS 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
- 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 firmware versionAccess the Sepcos web interface or management console and navigate to System Information or About section to view the installed firmware version. Alternatively, use the command-line interface or SNMP if available to query the firmware version.Affected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: >= 1.23.0 and < 1.23.21, or >= 1.24.0 and < 1.24.8, or >= 1.25.0 and < 1.25.3
-
Locate the root account configurationIn the Sepcos web interface, go to User Management, Administration, or Account Settings section to find the list of user accounts. Identify the root or administrator account.Affected if A root or administrator account exists with default credentials still in place (username 'root' or similar default admin account) and has never been changed since deployment.
-
Inspect password storage mechanismIf you have administrative access to the device backend or configuration files, examine how passwords are stored. Look for configuration files, database entries, or system files that contain password hashes. Check whether the hash format matches MD5 characteristics (32-character hexadecimal string).Affected if Password hashes are stored using MD5 algorithm, which can be identified by the 32-character hexadecimal format and confirmed by attempting to crack with standard MD5 cracking tools.
-
Verify default password has not been changedCompare the current root/administrator password against any documented default passwords provided in Secheron installation manuals. Attempt to log in with known default credentials if you have authorization to do so.Affected if The root account password matches the vendor default password or can be easily cracked using publicly available tools within a short timeframe.
Your environment is affected if the firmware version is within the vulnerable ranges AND the root account password remains at its default value stored using MD5 hashing.
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 · scoped1.23.211.24.81.25.3
Replace the weak default password with a strong, unique password and migrate from MD5 to a modern password hashing algorithm like bcrypt, scrypt, or Argon2.
1.23.21, 1.24.8, or 1.25.3 (depending on current branch)
- Identify the current firmware version running on the Sepcos Control And Protection Relay device
- Determine which version branch you are on (1.23.x, 1.24.x, or 1.25.x)
- Obtain the firmware upgrade from the vendor through official channels
- Upgrade the firmware to version 1.23.21 or later (if on 1.23.x branch), 1.24.8 or later (if on 1.24.x branch), or 1.25.3 or later (if on 1.25.x branch)
- After upgrade, immediately change the default root password to a strong, unique password following vendor password policy
- Verify the upgrade was successful and the new password is functioning correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-1666 — 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-2022-1666 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