CVE-2022-26143
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 · uneditedThe TP-240 (aka tp240dvr) component in Mitel MiCollab before 9.4 SP1 FP1 and MiVoice Business Express through 8.1 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information and cause a denial of service (performance degradation and excessive outbound traffic). This was exploited in the wild in February and March 2022 for the TP240PhoneHome DDoS attack.
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 TP-240 (tp240dvr) component in Mitel MiCollab and MiVoice Business Express contains a vulnerability allowing remote attackers to obtain sensitive information and cause denial of service via performance degradation and excessive outbound traffic. This was actively exploited in the wild as part of the TP240PhoneHome DDoS campaign in early 2022.
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< 9.4= 9.4<= 8.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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 if Mitel MiCollab is installedCheck system inventory or installed applications for Mitel MiCollab. On the server, look for MiCollab installation directories or check the version through the administrative interface if accessible.Affected if MiCollab is present with version less than 9.4 SP1 FP1, or version equals 9.4 (before applying the FP1 patch).
-
Identify if MiVoice Business Express is installedCheck system inventory or installed applications for MiVoice Business Express. Look for installation directories or check the version through the administrative interface.Affected if MiVoice Business Express is present with version 8.1 or lower.
-
Locate the TP-240 (tp240dvr) componentSearch for the tp240dvr service, process, or binary on the system. Check for processes named tp240dvr or files with tp240 in the filename within the Mitel installation directories.Affected if The tp240dvr component is found running on the system.
-
Verify TP-240 network exposureReview firewall rules and network configuration to determine if the TP-240 component ports or service is accessible from untrusted networks or the internet. Check for open ports associated with the tp240dvr service.Affected if The TP-240 component is exposed to untrusted networks or the internet without proper network segmentation.
-
Confirm version is within vulnerable rangeCompare the installed MiCollab or MiVoice Business Express version against the affected ranges: MiCollab < 9.4 or = 9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4; MiVoice Business Express <= 8.1.Affected if The installed version falls within the vulnerable version ranges.
The environment is affected if MiCollab (version 9.4 or below) or MiVoice Business Express (version 8.1 or below) is installed with the TP-240 component exposed to untrusted networks.
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 · scoped9.4
Apply the vendor-supplied patches: upgrade MiCollab to 9.4 SP1 FP1 or later, and review MiVoice Business Express deployments for appropriate mitigation given the affected versions through 8.1.
Mitel MiCollab 9.4 SP1 FP1 (or later); contact Mitel for MiVoice Business Express fixed release
- 1. Identify the current version of Mitel MiCollab or MiVoice Business Express by checking the system administration interface or running: /opt/mitel/bin/miadmin -V
- 2. For MiCollab: If running version 9.4 or earlier, plan upgrade to version 9.4 SP1 FP1 (or later)
- 3. For MiVoice Business Express: Contact Mitel support for the specific fixed release as the description only indicates <= 8.1 is affected but does not specify the fixed version
- 4. Create a full backup of the current system configuration and database before upgrading
- 5. Download the fixed version (MiCollab 9.4 SP1 FP1) from Mitel's official support portal at https://www.mitel.com/support or contact your authorized Mitel reseller
- 6. Apply the upgrade following the official Mitel upgrade documentation for your specific product
- 7. After upgrade, verify the tp240dvr service is running with authentication enabled and no unauthorized access is possible
- 8. Monitor system logs for any unusual outbound traffic patterns that might indicate ongoing exploitation
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-26143 — 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-2022-26143 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