CVE-2022-24043
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 DXR2 (All versions < V01.21.142.5-22), Desigo PXC3 (All versions < V01.21.142.4-18), Desigo PXC4 (All versions < V02.20.142.10-10884), Desigo PXC5 (All versions < V02.20.142.10-10884). The login functionality of the application fails to normalize the response times of login attempts performed with wrong usernames with the ones executed with correct usernames. A remote unauthenticated attacker could exploit this side-channel information to perform a username enumeration attack and identify valid usernames.
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 Desigo DXR2, PXC3, PXC4, and PXC5 building management systems contain a timing-based username enumeration vulnerability in their login function. The application fails to normalize response times between login attempts with invalid usernames versus valid usernames, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to infer valid usernames by measuring response times. This is a classic timing side-channel attack enabling username enumeration.
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< 01.21.142.5-22< 01.21.142.4-18< 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 the Desigo device modelLocate the model identifier (DXR2, PXC3, PXC4, or PXC5) on the physical device label, web interface, or system documentationAffected if The model is one of DXR2, PXC3, PXC4, or PXC5
-
Determine the installed firmware versionAccess the device web interface or administrative console and navigate to the system information or firmware version pageAffected if The firmware version is visible and can be compared to the affected ranges
-
Compare firmware version against affected thresholdsMatch your installed version to the following thresholds: DXR2 < 01.21.142.5-22, PXC3 < 01.21.142.4-18, PXC4/PXC5 < 02.20.142.10-10884Affected if The installed version is lower than the threshold for your specific model
-
Verify timing variation in login responses (optional verification)If you have access to the login interface, attempt multiple login attempts with a known invalid username and measure response times, then compare against login attempts with a valid usernameAffected if You observe measurable timing differences between responses for invalid versus valid usernames
You are affected if your Desigo device is a DXR2, PXC3, PXC4, or PXC5 model running firmware version below the threshold for your model, as the vulnerability allows username enumeration through timing side-channel analysis.
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 · scoped01.21.142.4-1801.21.142.5-2202.20.142.10-10884
Apply the vendor-supplied patches (V01.21.142.5-22 for DXR2, V01.21.142.4-18 for PXC3, V02.20.142.10-10884 for PXC4/PXC5) which implement constant-time authentication responses. Additionally, consider network segmentation and monitoring for repeated login attempts as compensating controls.
Desigo DXR2: V01.21.142.5-22 | Desigo PXC3: V01.21.142.4-18 | Desigo PXC4: V02.20.142.10-10884 | Desigo PXC5: V02.20.142.10-10884
- 1. Identify the specific Desigo device model (DXR2, PXC3, PXC4, or PXC5) in your environment
- 2. Check the current firmware version of the affected device through the management interface
- 3. Download the updated firmware from Siemens cert-portal.siemens.com: For DXR2 use V01.21.142.5-22 or later, for PXC3 use V01.21.142.4-18 or later, for PXC4 use V02.20.142.10-10884 or later, for PXC5 use V02.20.142.10-10884 or later
- 4. Follow Siemens official firmware upgrade procedures for the specific device model, typically via the web management interface or dedicated upgrade tool
- 5. After upgrade, verify the new firmware version is installed and confirm the vulnerability is remediated by testing login response times
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $4,160.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-24043 — 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-2022-24043 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