CVE-2022-30792
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 · uneditedIn CmpChannelServer of CODESYS V3 in multiple versions an uncontrolled ressource consumption allows an unauthorized attacker to block new communication channel connections. Existing connections are not affected.
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 confidenceA resource consumption vulnerability in CmpChannelServer of CODESYS V3 allows unauthorized attackers to exhaust connection resources, preventing legitimate new communication channel connections from being established. The issue stems from insufficient controls on resource allocation during connection attempts, effectively causing a denial of service for new clients while existing connections remain unaffected.
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< 4.5.0.0< 4.5.0.0< 4.6.0.0< 4.5.0.0< 4.5.0.0< 4.5.0.0< 4.6.0.0< 4.5.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Identify the CODESYS Control product and version installedLocate the CODESYS Control runtime package on the device and retrieve its version number. This is typically found in the runtime installation directory, system information, or product documentation for the specific hardware platform (Beaglebone, Raspberry Pi, Linux, PFC100, PFC200, IoT2000, Empc, or PLCnext).Affected if The installed version is lower than 4.5.0.0 for most products, or lower than 4.6.0.0 for IoT2000 SL or PLCnext variants.
-
Confirm CmpChannelServer component is in useVerify that the CODESYS runtime is configured to accept network client connections. CmpChannelServer is the component that handles client-server communication channels. Check the runtime configuration or system logs for active network communication listener status.Affected if The CmpChannelServer component is enabled and accepting network connections, which is the default state for CODESYS Control runtime.
-
Check for connection resource exhaustionMonitor the number of active and pending connections on the CODESYS runtime service. On Linux-based systems, this may involve checking network socket states or runtime diagnostics. Look for connection attempts that are being rejected or queued beyond normal capacity.Affected if New client connections are being refused or timing out while existing connections remain active, indicating connection resource exhaustion.
You are affected if the CODESYS Control runtime version is below the patched versions (4.5.0.0 or 4.6.0.0 depending on product) and the CmpChannelServer component is active, allowing remote attackers to exhaust connection resources.
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 · scoped4.5.0.04.6.0.0
Apply the vendor-provided patch for CODESYS V3 addressing this vulnerability; as a compensating control, implement network segmentation and connection rate limiting to reduce attack surface.
CODESYS Control products: upgrade to version 4.5.0.0 or later (or 4.6.0.0 for IoT2000 SL and PLCnext variants)
- 1. Identify which CODESYS Control product variant is in use (Beaglebone, Empc A/imx6, IoT2000 SL, Linux SL, PFC100 SL, PFC200 SL, PLCnext, or Raspberry Pi SL)
- 2. Obtain the latest version of the specific CODESYS Control product from the official vendor (CODESYS)
- 3. Create a backup of the current project configurations and runtime settings
- 4. Download the appropriate fixed version: 4.5.0.0 or later for most products; 4.6.0.0 or later for IoT2000 SL and PLCnext variants
- 5. Uninstall or stop the current CODESYS Control runtime service
- 6. Install the new fixed version of the Control product
- 7. Restore the project configurations from the backup
- 8. Start the CODESYS Control runtime service
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-30792 — 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-2022-30792 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