CVE-2022-24381
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 · uneditedAll versions of package asneg/opcuastack are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) due to a missing limitation on the number of received chunks - per single session or in total for all concurrent sessions. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability by sending an unlimited number of huge chunks (e.g. 2GB each) without sending the Final closing chunk.
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 opcuastack package fails to enforce limits on received chunks per session or globally across concurrent sessions. Attackers can send unlimited massive chunks (e.g., 2GB each) without sending the required Final closing chunk, causing memory exhaustion and DoS on the OPC UA 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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 opcuastack installationSearch the system for files or packages named 'opcuastack', 'opcua-stack', or 'Asneg Opc Ua Stack'. Check project dependencies (e.g., package.json, requirements.txt, pom.xml) for this package.Affected if The opcuastack package from Asneg is found in dependencies or installed on the system.
-
Verify chunk limit configuration existsSearch configuration files for settings related to 'chunk', 'maxChunk', 'chunkLimit', or 'maxChunksPerSession'. Check both runtime config files and application defaults.Affected if No chunk limit configuration is found or the configuration allows unlimited chunks (no upper bound set).
-
Check for global chunk aggregation limitsLook for settings that limit total chunks across all concurrent sessions, such as 'maxTotalChunks', 'globalChunkLimit', or 'aggregateLimit'. Inspect server-wide resource policies.Affected if No global chunk limit across sessions is configured or enforced.
-
Inspect session timeout enforcementSearch for timeout settings that enforce a maximum wait time for receiving the Final closing chunk from a client. Look for 'sessionTimeout', 'chunkTimeout', 'finalChunkTimeout', or similar settings.Affected if No timeout is configured for waiting on Final chunks, or timeouts are set to unlimited/unbounded values.
If the Asneg Opc Ua Stack is in use and none of the three protections (per-session chunk limits, global chunk limits, or Final chunk timeouts) are configured, the environment is vulnerable to memory exhaustion from unbounded chunk reception.
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 dataImplement chunk count limits per session and aggregate limits across all concurrent sessions. Add timeout enforcement to reject sessions that do not send Final chunks within reasonable timeframes.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-24381 — 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-2022-24381 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