CVE-2022-25156
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 · uneditedUse of Weak Hash vulnerability in Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-F series FX5U(C) CPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-F series FX5UJ CPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series R00/01/02CPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series R04/08/16/32/120(EN)CPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series R08/16/32/120SFCPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series R08/16/32/120PCPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series R08/16/32/120PSFCPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series RJ71C24(-R2/R4) all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series RJ71EN71 all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series RJ72GF15-T2 all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series Q03UDECPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series Q04/06/10/13/20/26/50/100UDEHCPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series Q03/04/06/13/26UDVCPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series Q04/06/13/26UDPVCPU all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series QJ71C24N(-R2/R4) all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series QJ71E71-100 all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series QJ72BR15 all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series QJ72LP25(-25/G/GE) all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC L series L02/06/26CPU(-P) all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC L series L26CPU-(P)BT all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC L series LJ71C24(-R2) all versions, Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC L series LJ71E71-100 all versions and Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC L series LJ72GF15-T2 all versions allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to login to the product by using a password reversed from a previously eavesdropped password hash.
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 vulnerability stems from the use of a weak hashing algorithm for password storage in Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC PLCs. An attacker who has eavesdropped on a password hash can reverse it to obtain the plaintext password and then use those credentials to authenticate to the device remotely without any other information.
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 versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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 PLC modelUse the vendor engineering software (GX Works3) or physically inspect the PLC unit to confirm the exact model number matches one of the affected models: FX5UC, FX5UC-32MR/DS, FX5UC-32MT/D, FX5UC-32MT/DSS, FX5UJ-24MR/ES, FX5UJ-24MT/ES, FX5UJ-24MT/ESS, or FX5UJ-40MR/ESAffected if The model matches any of the listed affected products
-
Verify the firmware versionConnect to the PLC via GX Works3, navigate to the CPU module properties, and read the firmware version fieldAffected if All firmware versions are affected, so any version confirms exposure
-
Confirm password-based authentication is in useCheck the PLC project settings in GX Works3 under the CPU module security settings, or examine network traffic to determine if password authentication is being used for remote accessAffected if Password-based authentication is enabled or remote password-based access is observed in network traffic
If the PLC is any of the FX5UC or FX5UJ models and password-based authentication is enabled or in use, the environment is affected by this weak password hashing vulnerability.
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 dataApply vendor-provided firmware patches when available, implement network segmentation to limit exposure of affected PLCs to untrusted networks, and consider additional authentication controls such as VPN access to the industrial network.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $13,632.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-25156 — 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-2022-25156 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