CVE-2022-1941
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 parsing vulnerability for the MessageSet type in the ProtocolBuffers versions prior to and including 3.16.1, 3.17.3, 3.18.2, 3.19.4, 3.20.1 and 3.21.5 for protobuf-cpp, and versions prior to and including 3.16.1, 3.17.3, 3.18.2, 3.19.4, 3.20.1 and 4.21.5 for protobuf-python can lead to out of memory failures. A specially crafted message with multiple key-value per elements creates parsing issues, and can lead to a Denial of Service against services receiving unsanitized input. We recommend upgrading to versions 3.18.3, 3.19.5, 3.20.2, 3.21.6 for protobuf-cpp and 3.18.3, 3.19.5, 3.20.2, 4.21.6 for protobuf-python. Versions for 3.16 and 3.17 are no longer updated.
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 confidenceA parsing vulnerability in ProtocolBuffers (protobuf-cpp and protobuf-python) versions prior to those specified allows specially crafted messages with multiple key-value elements per MessageSet type to cause out of memory failures, leading to Denial of Service when services receive unsanitized input.
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= 36= 37= 10.0< 3.18.3>= 3.19.0, < 3.19.5>= 3.20.0, < 3.20.2>= 3.21.0, < 3.21.6< 3.18.3>= 3.19.0, < 3.19.5>= 3.20.0, < 3.20.2>= 4.0.0, < 4.21.6CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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 installed Protobuf C++ versionRun 'protoc --version' or check package manager: 'dpkg -l | grep protobuf' (Debian) or 'rpm -qa | grep protobuf' (Fedora)Affected if Version is < 3.18.3, or between 3.19.0-3.19.4, or between 3.20.0-3.20.1, or between 3.21.0-3.21.5
-
Identify installed Protobuf Python versionRun 'python3 -c "import google.protobuf; print(google.protobuf.__version__)"' or check pip: 'pip show protobuf'Affected if Version is < 3.18.3, or between 3.19.0-3.19.4, or between 3.20.0-3.20.1, or between 4.0.0-4.21.5
-
Check OS distribution package versionsFor Fedora: 'cat /etc/fedora-release'. For Debian: 'cat /etc/debian_version'. Check installed package versions with 'dnf list protobuf' (Fedora) or 'apt-cache policy libprotobuf-dev' (Debian)Affected if Running Fedora 36 or 37, or Debian 10, with protobuf packages from the distribution repository
-
Confirm MessageSet usage in your servicesInspect application code and protobuf .proto definitions for 'option message_set_wire_format = true;' or runtime MessageSet parsing of untrusted inputAffected if Your services parse MessageSet format messages from untrusted network sources
You are affected if you run any protobuf C++ version before 3.18.3, 3.19.0-3.19.4, 3.20.0-3.20.1, or 3.21.0-3.21.5, or protobuf Python version before 3.18.3, 3.19.0-3.19.4, 3.20.0-3.20.1, or 4.0.0-4.21.5, and your services accept unsanitized MessageSet input from untrusted sources.
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 · scoped3.18.33.19.53.20.2
Upgrade protobuf libraries to version 3.18.3/3.19.5/3.20.2/3.21.6 for C++ or 3.18.3/3.19.5/3.20.2/4.21.6 for Python, and sanitize or reject MessageSet input from untrusted sources.
protobuf-cpp to 3.21.6 (or 3.20.2/3.19.5/3.18.3); protobuf-python to 4.21.6 (or 3.20.2/3.19.5/3.18.3)
- Identify which protobuf library is in use (protobuf-cpp or protobuf-python)
- Check current installed version using package manager or dependency file (e.g., pip show protobuf or pkg-config --modversion protobuf)
- For protobuf-cpp: upgrade to version 3.21.6 (or 3.20.2, 3.19.5, or 3.18.3 as alternative)
- For protobuf-python: upgrade to version 4.21.6 (or 3.20.2, 3.19.5, or 3.18.3 as alternative)
- Use appropriate package manager: pip install --upgrade protobuf==3.21.6 (Python) or system package manager (e.g., dnf/apt) for system packages
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the new version
- Restart any services or applications using protobuf to load the fixed version
- If using Fedora 36/37 or Debian 10, ensure the distribution's package repositories have updated protobuf packages and apply system updates
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,072.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-1941 — 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-2022-1941 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