CVE-2022-2338
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 · uneditedSofting Secure Integration Server V1.22 is vulnerable to authentication bypass via a machine-in-the-middle attack. The default the administration interface is accessible via plaintext HTTP protocol, facilitating the attack. The HTTP request may contain the session cookie in the request, which may be captured for use in authenticating to the server.
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 confidenceSofting Secure Integration Server V1.22 has an authentication bypass vulnerability where the default administration interface is accessible via plaintext HTTP. An attacker positioned on the network path (machine-in-the-middle) can capture session cookies from unencrypted HTTP traffic and reuse them to authenticate to the server.
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= 3.1= 3.1= 5.2= 6= 1.22= 1.74CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/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 installed Softing product and versionLocate and verify the installed Softing product (Edgeaggregator, Edgeconnector, Opc, Opc Ua C++ SDK, Secure Integration Server, or Uagates) and its exact version number. Compare against the affected versions: 3.1, 5.2, 6, 1.22, or 1.74.Affected if The product is one of the listed affected products AND the installed version matches exactly (3.1, 5.2, 6, 1.22, or 1.74).
-
Check if HTTP is enabled for the administration interfaceInspect the server or application configuration files and settings to determine whether the administrative web interface is configured to accept plaintext HTTP connections.Affected if HTTP (port 80) is enabled for the admin interface in the configuration.
-
Verify admin interface accessibility over HTTPAttempt to access the administration interface using HTTP (not HTTPS) on the expected port. If the login page or admin dashboard loads over plaintext HTTP, the system is vulnerable.Affected if The admin interface is accessible and responds over unencrypted HTTP.
-
Confirm HTTPS is not enforced for admin accessCheck whether the server is configured to redirect HTTP requests to HTTPS, enforce HTTPS-only access, or if HSTS headers are present.Affected if HTTP requests to the admin interface are not redirected to HTTPS, and HTTPS is not enforced.
A user is affected if they have one of the listed product versions installed AND the administration interface is accessible over plaintext HTTP without enforced HTTPS redirection.
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 dataEnable HTTPS for the administration interface and ensure all administrative access occurs exclusively over encrypted connections. Consider implementing HSTS and proper TLS configuration.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $3,168.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-2338 — 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-2022-2338 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