CVE-2022-2970
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 · uneditedMZ Automation's libIEC61850 (versions 1.4 and prior; version 1.5 prior to commit a3b04b7bc4872a5a39e5de3fdc5fbde52c09e10e) does not sanitize input before memcpy is used, which could allow an attacker to crash the device or remotely execute arbitrary code.
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 confidencelibIEC61850, an IEC 61850 protocol implementation library used in power system automation, fails to validate input size before performing memcpy operations, leading to a buffer overflow vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker could exploit this to cause denial of service or achieve arbitrary code execution on affected devices.
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< 1.5.0CVSS 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.
-
Locate libIEC61850 library on the systemSearch for files named libiec61850, libiec61850.so, or iec61850.dll in common library directories such as /usr/lib, /usr/local/lib, /opt, or the application's deployment directory. Use commands like 'find / -name "*iec61850*" 2>/dev/null' or check the application's dependency lists.Affected if The library is present on the system and its version is below 1.5.0, or the version cannot be determined.
-
Determine the installed version of libIEC61850Check for version information in the library file, associated header files, or the application's documentation. Run 'strings' on the library file to look for version strings, or check the output of 'dpkg -l | grep iec61850' (Debian-based) or 'rpm -qa | grep iec61850' (RHEL-based). Compare the found version against the affected range of versions below 1.5.0.Affected if The installed version is any version prior to 1.5.0, or if the version cannot be verified and the library is present.
-
Identify applications or services using libIEC61850Review running processes for applications that handle IEC 61850 protocols, such as substation automation controllers, SCADA components, or IED (Intelligent Electronic Device) simulators. Use 'ps aux | grep -i iec' or 'netstat -anp | grep 102' (Port 102 is commonly used for IEC 61850 MMS).Affected if An IEC 61850 server, client, or IED simulator is running and linked to a vulnerable version of the library.
-
Check if MMS (Manufacturing Message Specification) services are enabledInspect the application configuration files for IEC 61850 server or client settings. Look for MMS protocol handler configuration, GOOSE or Sampled Values setup, or IED server instances. Review any XML configuration files (for example, cid_files, icd_files) used by the application.Affected if MMS services are enabled and the underlying library version is below 1.5.0, allowing the vulnerable memcpy code path to be exercised during MMS message processing.
A system is affected if libIEC61850 version 1.5.0 or later is not confirmed to be installed, and the library is in use by any IEC 61850 application or service on the network.
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 · scoped1.5.0
Update libIEC61850 to version 1.5 with commit a3b04b7bc4872a5a39e5de3fdc5fbde52c09e10e or later, or to version 1.5.1+. For systems that cannot update immediately, network segmentation and restricting access to IEC 61850 services can reduce exposure.
libIEC61850 version 1.5.0 or later
- 1. Identify the current version of libIEC61850 in use by checking project dependencies or library files
- 2. Verify the version is less than 1.5.0
- 3. Upgrade libIEC61850 to version 1.5.0 or later from the official repository (https://github.com/mz-automation/libIEC61850)
- 4. Rebuild and redeploy the application with the updated library
- 5. Test the application to ensure functionality is maintained after the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing24.0 h
- Review / QA12.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $16,384.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-2970 — 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-2022-2970 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