CVE-2022-20814
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 vulnerability in the certificate validation of Cisco Expressway-C and Cisco TelePresence VCS could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to gain unauthorized access to sensitive data. The vulnerability is due to a lack of validation of the SSL server certificate that an affected device receives when it establishes a connection to a Cisco Unified Communications Manager device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by using a man-in-the-middle technique to intercept the traffic between the devices, and then using a self-signed certificate to impersonate the endpoint. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to view the intercepted traffic in clear text or alter the contents of the traffic. Note: Cisco Expressway-E is not affected by this vulnerability.Cisco has released software updates that address this vulnerability. There are no workarounds that address this vulnerability.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability in Cisco Expressway-C and TelePresence VCS allows a man-in-the-middle attacker to intercept SSL connections to Cisco Unified Communications Manager by presenting a self-signed certificate. The affected devices fail to properly validate the SSL server certificate, enabling the attacker to impersonate the endpoint and view or modify traffic in clear text.
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= x8.1= x8.1.1= x8.1.2= x8.2= x8.2.1= x8.2.2= x8.5= x8.5.1= x8.5.2= x8.5.3= x8.6= x8.6.1CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 installed Cisco Telepresence VCS versionLog into the VCS administrative interface and navigate to Overview page, or run 'xStatus' command via CLI to display the software versionAffected if The displayed version matches any of these: x8.1, x8.1.1, x8.1.2, x8.2, x8.2.1, x8.2.2, x8.5, x8.5.1, x8.5.2, x8.5.3, x8.6, x8.6.1
-
Identify the installed Cisco Expressway-C versionLog into the Expressway-C admin interface and check the version under System > About, or use CLI command 'show version'Affected if The installed version falls within the same affected x8.x range listed for VCS and matches the specific vulnerable versions
-
Verify SSL/TLS connectivity is enabledCheck the VCS/Expressway-C configuration under Maintenance > Security or Traversal zone settings to confirm TLS/DTLS is enabled for communications with Cisco Unified Communications ManagerAffected if TLS or DTLS is enabled, which is required for the certificate validation flaw to be exploitable
-
Confirm the device communicates with Cisco Unified Communications ManagerReview the VCS/Expressway-C neighbor zone configuration or dial plan to identify if it has a connection to a CUCM instanceAffected if A neighbor zone or traversal client connection to CUCM exists, as this is the attack vector where the improper certificate validation occurs
You are affected if your Cisco Telepresence VCS or Expressway-C version matches any of the listed x8.1 through x8.6.1 versions AND the device uses TLS/SSL to communicate with Cisco Unified Communications Manager.
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 · scopedApply the Cisco software updates that address this vulnerability. There are no workarounds available.
Upgrade to Cisco TelePresence VCS / Expressway-C version x8.3 or later (fixed release)
- Identify the current installed version of Cisco TelePresence VCS or Cisco Expressway-C by accessing the administration interface or using the CLI command 'xstatus version'
- Download the fixed software version from the Cisco software download page (software.cisco.com) or obtain it through your Cisco smart account
- Upload the new software image through the administration interface under Maintenance > Upgrade option, or use the CLI 'upgrade' command
- Verify the upgrade completes successfully and the system restarts
- Confirm the new version is installed by checking the version information again
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-20814 — 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-2022-20814 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