CVE-2022-24039
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 has been identified in Desigo PXC4 (All versions < V02.20.142.10-10884), Desigo PXC5 (All versions < V02.20.142.10-10884). The “addCell” JavaScript function fails to properly sanitize user-controllable input before including it into the generated XML body of the XLS report document, such that it is possible to inject arbitrary content (e.g., XML tags) into the generated file. An attacker with restricted privileges, by poisoning any of the content used to generate XLS reports, could be able to leverage the application to deliver malicious files against higher-privileged users and obtain Remote Code Execution (RCE) against the administrator’s workstation.
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 confidenceThe 'addCell' JavaScript function in Desigo PXC4 and PXC5 fails to sanitize user input before embedding it into the XML body of generated XLS reports, allowing XML injection. An attacker with restricted privileges can poison report content to deliver malicious files to higher-privileged users, achieving RCE on the administrator's workstation.
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< 02.20.142.10-10884< 02.20.142.10-10884CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/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 device modelLocate the Desigo device and confirm it is either a PXC4 or PXC5 controller by checking the model label or system information in the web interface or device documentationAffected if The device is a PXC4 or PXC5 controller
-
Check installed firmware versionAccess the device web interface or CLI and navigate to the system information or firmware version section to determine the current firmware build numberAffected if The firmware version is earlier than 02.20.142.10-10884 (for example, 02.20.xxx or earlier builds)
-
Verify XLS report generation is accessibleCheck if the report generation feature that produces XLS reports is enabled and accessible to users in the system configuration or user management settingsAffected if XLS report generation feature is enabled and accessible to users
-
Check user privilege configurationReview user accounts and their assigned privilege levels to determine if restricted or low-privilege users have access to the report generation functionalityAffected if Restricted or low-privilege user accounts can access or generate XLS reports
The environment is affected if the device is a PXC4 or PXC5 running firmware version earlier than 02.20.142.10-10884 AND the XLS report generation feature is accessible to users with restricted privileges, allowing them to inject malicious content.
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 · scoped02.20.142.10-10884
Upgrade Desigo PXC4/PXC5 to version V02.20.142.10-10884 or later to remediate this vulnerability.
Desigo PXC4/PXC5 Firmware V02.20.142.10-10884 or later
- Identify the specific Desigo PXC4 or PXC5 device model and current firmware version
- Download the firmware version 02.20.142.10-10884 or later from Siemens cert-portal.siemens.com
- Follow Siemens firmware update instructions for the specific device (typically via the device web interface or management tool)
- Verify the firmware upgrade was successful by checking the installed version
- Confirm the 'addCell' function now properly sanitizes input before including it in XLS report XML
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-24039 — 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-2022-24039 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