CVE-2022-27577
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 vulnerability in the MSC800 in all versions before 4.15 allows for an attacker to predict the TCP initial sequence number. When the TCP sequence is predictable, an attacker can send packets that are forged to appear to come from a trusted computer. These forged packets could compromise services on the MSC800. SICK has released a new firmware version of the SICK MSC800 and recommends updating to the newest version.
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 SICK MSC800 in versions before 4.15 has a vulnerability that allows attackers to predict TCP initial sequence numbers. This predictability enables attackers to forge TCP packets appearing to originate from trusted sources, potentially compromising device services through session hijacking or injection attacks.
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< 4.15CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Confirm device is SICK MSC800Identify the device model through device labeling, network discovery, or management interface to verify the model is SICK MSC800Affected if Device is not a SICK MSC800 unit
-
Retrieve firmware versionAccess the device management interface, web UI, or system information page to obtain the currently installed firmware version numberAffected if Unable to retrieve firmware version from the device
-
Compare version to affected rangeCompare the installed firmware version against version 4.15. Check if the version is any release below 4.15 (such as 4.14, 4.13, 4.12, or earlier)Affected if Firmware version is less than 4.15
The device is affected if it is a SICK MSC800 running firmware version prior to 4.15, where the TCP sequence number predictability vulnerability exists.
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 · scoped4.15
Update the SICK MSC800 firmware to version 4.15 or later to remediate the TCP sequence number predictability vulnerability.
Firmware version 4.15
- Check current MSC800 firmware version via the device web interface or SICK Configuration Manager
- Navigate to the official SICK support website (sick.com) and locate the MSC800 product page
- Download the firmware version 4.15 or latest available version from SICK
- Follow SICK's official firmware upgrade procedure documented in the MSC800 operating instructions
- After updating, verify the firmware version displays 4.15 or higher in the device interface
- Confirm the MSC800 is functioning normally after the upgrade
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-2022-27577 — 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-2022-27577 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