CVE-2022-29825
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 Hard-coded Password vulnerability in Mitsubishi Electric GX Works3 versions from 1.000A to 1.090U, GT Designer3 Version1 (GOT2000) versions from 1.122C to 1.290C, and MT Works2 versions from 1.100E to 1.200J allows an unauthenticated attacker to disclose sensitive information. As a result, unauthenticated users may view programs and project files or execute programs illegally.
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 confidenceHard-coded password vulnerability in Mitsubishi Electric GX Works3, GT Designer3, and MT Works2 allows unauthenticated attackers to bypass authentication and access sensitive project files, programs, and potentially execute unauthorized programs without credentials.
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>= 1.000a, <= 1.011m>= 1.015r, <= 1.086q>= 1.087rCVSS 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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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 installed Mitsubishi softwareCheck program files for GX Works3, GT Designer3, or MT Works2 folders, or look for desktop shortcuts and installed programs in Add/Remove ProgramsAffected if Any of these three products are installed on the system
-
Determine GX Works3 versionRight-click the GX Works3 shortcut, select Properties, and check the version field under the Details tab, or open GX Works3 and go to Help > Version InformationAffected if Version is >= 1.000a and <= 1.011m, OR >= 1.015r and <= 1.086q, OR >= 1.087r
-
Determine GT Designer3 versionOpen GT Designer3 and check Help > Version Information, or check the program's Properties Details tabAffected if GT Designer3 is installed (no version range provided, but vulnerability exists in this product)
-
Determine MT Works2 versionOpen MT Works2 and check Help > Version Information, or check the program's Properties Details tabAffected if MT Works2 is installed (no version range provided, but vulnerability exists in this product)
The environment is affected if GX Works3, GT Designer3, or MT Works2 is installed and the GX Works3 version falls within the specified vulnerable ranges, or if GT Designer3/MT Works2 of any version are present since the hardcoded password vulnerability exists in those products.
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 patches when available; until then, implement compensating controls such as network segmentation, restricting external access to affected systems, monitoring for unauthorized access, and reviewing access logs for indicators of compromise.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $11,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-29825 — 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-2022-29825 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