Sweet BApplication · Westerndigital

CVE-2022-23003

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-07-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
When computing a shared secret or point multiplication on the NIST P-256 curve that results in an X coordinate of zero, the resulting output is not properly reduced modulo the P-256 field prime and is invalid. The resulting output may cause an error when used in other operations. This may be leveraged by an attacker to cause an error scenario or incorrect choice of session key in applications which use the library, resulting in a limited denial of service for an individual user. The scope of impact cannot extend to other components.

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 confidence

This is a bug in elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) operations on NIST P-256. When computing a shared secret or point multiplication that results in an X coordinate of zero, the output is not properly reduced modulo the P-256 field prime, producing invalid output. This can cause errors or lead to incorrect session keys in applications using the affected library.

MitigationApplications should update to a patched version of the cryptographic library that properly reduces results modulo the P-256 field prime. Users of ECDH or ECDSA operations on P-256 should verify their library vendor has addressed this issue.

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
Sweet BApplication
Affected:= 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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if Western Digital Sweet B library is in use
    Search for files named 'sweetb', 'libsweetb', or check package manifests/bom files that reference Westerndigital Sweet B or 'sweet-b' cryptographic library
    Affected if The library is present in the environment
  2. Determine installed Sweet B library version
    Check library version through package manager, library metadata, or binary version information if the library is linked
    Affected if Version is 1.x (any version 1 series) as the affected version range is version 1
  3. Verify P-256 ECC operations are performed
    Review application code, configuration, or runtime logs for ECDH or ECDSA operations using NIST P-256 curve (also known as secp256r1 or prime256v1)
    Affected if The application performs ECDH key exchange or ECDSA signatures using P-256 curve
  4. Check for errors in P-256 shared secret or point multiplication
    Monitor application logs, error messages, or TLS handshake failures that may indicate invalid point multiplication results. Specifically look for errors occurring during ECDH key agreement on P-256
    Affected if Errors or incorrect session keys occur during P-256 ECDH operations, which may indicate the unreduced zero coordinate bug is triggering

A system is affected if it uses Western Digital Sweet B version 1 and performs ECDH or ECDSA operations on NIST P-256 curve where point multiplication results in an X coordinate of zero.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Applications should update to a patched version of the cryptographic library that properly reduces results modulo the P-256 field prime. Users of ECDH or ECDSA operations on P-256 should verify their library vendor has addressed this issue.

Fix this in Sweet B Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA6.0 h
30.0 hours of engineering $5,120
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-23003 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-23003 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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