CVE-2022-20968
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 Cisco Discovery Protocol processing feature of Cisco IP Phone 7800 and 8800 Series firmware could allow an unauthenticated, adjacent attacker to cause a stack overflow on an affected device. This vulnerability is due to insufficient input validation of received Cisco Discovery Protocol packets. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted Cisco Discovery Protocol traffic to an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause a stack overflow, resulting in possible remote code execution or a denial of service (DoS) condition on an affected device.
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 confidenceA stack overflow vulnerability exists in the Cisco Discovery Protocol processing of Cisco IP Phone 7800 and 8800 Series firmware. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input validation of received CDP packets, allowing an unauthenticated adjacent attacker to send crafted CDP traffic that triggers the overflow. Successful exploitation could enable remote code execution or cause a denial of service condition on affected devices.
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= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)= 9.3\(3\)= 9.3\(4\)= 9.3\(4\)sr1= 9.3\(4\)sr2= 9.3\(4\)sr3= 10.1\(1\)sr1= 10.1\(1\)sr2= 10.1\(1.9\)= 10.2\(1\)= 10.2\(1\)sr1= 10.2\(2\)= 10.3\(1\)CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 the phone modelAccess the phone's web interface, admin menu, or display the device info screen to determine the exact model number (7811, 7821, 7832, 7841, 7861, 8811, 8831, or 8832).Affected if The device is NOT one of these eight models.
-
Check the firmware versionNavigate to Settings > Status > Firmware Version on the phone, or access the web interface admin page to view the installed firmware version.Affected if The installed version matches one of these: 9.3(3), 9.3(4), 9.3(4)sr1, 9.3(4)sr2, 9.3(4)sr3, 10.1(1)sr1, 10.1(1)sr2, 10.1(1.9), 10.2(1), 10.2(1)sr1, 10.2(2), 10.3(1).
-
Verify CDP processing is enabledCheck the phone's network settings or admin menu for Cisco Discovery Protocol status. CDP is typically enabled by default on Cisco phones.Affected if CDP is enabled and the device is processing CDP packets from the network.
A device is affected if it is one of the eight listed phone models, runs one of the twelve specific firmware versions listed, and has CDP enabled to process incoming Cisco Discovery Protocol packets.
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 dataApply the vendor-provided firmware update for Cisco IP Phone 7800 and 8800 Series. Until patched, limit physical/adjacent network access to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-20968 — 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-2022-20968 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