CVE-2022-25160
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 · uneditedCleartext Storage of Sensitive Information 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 R16/32/64MTCPU 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 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 and Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC Q series QJ71E71-100 all versions allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to disclose a file in a legitimate user's product by using previously eavesdropped cleartext information and to counterfeit a legitimate user’s system.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability involves the storage of sensitive information (likely credentials, configuration data, or authentication tokens) in cleartext within Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC PLCs (iQ-F, iQ-R, and Q series). An attacker who can intercept network traffic (eavesdrop) can obtain this unencrypted sensitive data and use it to access files on legitimate users' devices or impersonate authorized users to counterfeit the system.
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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 PLC model and seriesQuery the PLC hardware model identifier via the engineering software (GX Works3) or device network configuration. Look for model numbers matching FX5uc or FX5uj series variants.Affected if The installed model is one of the listed affected products (FX5uc or FX5uj series variants)
-
Check firmware versionUsing GX Works3 or the PLC's system information, retrieve the firmware version. The affected products list indicates all versions are vulnerable.Affected if The firmware version belongs to any FX5uc or FX5uj variant, as all versions are affected per the advisory
-
Capture and inspect network trafficUse a network sniffer or protocol analyzer on the segment carrying PLC communications. Examine traffic for plaintext transmission of credentials, authentication tokens, configuration data, or other sensitive information.Affected if Sensitive data such as passwords, tokens, or configuration is observed in cleartext within the captured network traffic
-
Verify communication encryptionCheck whether the PLC communications are protected by encryption protocols such as VPN, IPsec, or TLS. Inspect the network configuration and security settings in GX Works3.Affected if No encryption layer (VPN/IPsec/TLS) is applied to protect PLC communications, leaving data exposed in cleartext
-
Inspect stored credentials and configurationUsing GX Works3, examine the PLC's stored configuration, CPU parameters, and security settings for any hardcoded credentials, keys, or sensitive data stored without encryption.Affected if Credentials, keys, or sensitive configuration data are found stored in plaintext on the device
A user is affected if they have an FX5uc or FX5uj series PLC and sensitive data (credentials, tokens, config) is transmitted or stored in cleartext without additional encryption protection.
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-supplied firmware updates when available. Until then, implement network segmentation and monitor for unauthorized access attempts. Consider additional encryption layers (VPN/IPsec) for PLC communications to protect any cleartext data in transit.
- Consultation8.0 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 $12,352.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-25160 — 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-2022-25160 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