CVE-2022-31075
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 · uneditedKubeEdge is an open source system for extending native containerized application orchestration capabilities to hosts at Edge. Prior to versions 1.11.1, 1.10.2, and 1.9.4, EdgeCore may be susceptible to a DoS attack on CloudHub if an attacker was to send a well-crafted HTTP request to `/edge.crt`. If an attacker can send a well-crafted HTTP request to CloudHub, and that request has a very large body, that request can crash the HTTP service through a memory exhaustion vector. The request body is being read into memory, and a body that is larger than the available memory can lead to a successful attack. Because the request would have to make it through authorization, only authorized users may perform this attack. The consequence of the exhaustion is that CloudHub will be in denial of service. KubeEdge is affected only when users enable the CloudHub module in the file `cloudcore.yaml`. This bug has been fixed in Kubeedge 1.11.1, 1.10.2, and 1.9.4. As a workaround, disable the CloudHub switch in the config file `cloudcore.yaml`.
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 confidenceKubeEdge CloudHub component is vulnerable to a memory exhaustion DoS attack. An attacker sending a well-crafted HTTP request with an excessively large body to the /edge.crt endpoint can cause CloudHub to run out of memory and become unavailable. The vulnerability exists because the request body is read into memory without size limits. Only systems with CloudHub module enabled in cloudcore.yaml are affected.
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< 1.9.4>= 1.10.0, < 1.10.2>= 1.11.0, < 1.11.1CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Locate the KubeEdge CloudHub configuration fileFind the cloudcore.yaml file, typically located at /etc/kubeedge/cloudcore.yaml or in the directory where KubeEdge cloud components were deployedAffected if The file cannot be located - CloudHub may not be deployed or uses a non-standard configuration path
-
Verify CloudHub module is enabledOpen cloudcore.yaml and search for a 'cloudHub:' section or 'modules:' section containing 'cloudHub:' with 'enable: true' setAffected if The CloudHub module is present and enabled (enable: true) in the configuration file
-
Identify the installed KubeEdge versionRun 'cloudcore --version' or check the version from the cloudcore binary, or inspect the KubeEdge deployment manifests/images for the version tagAffected if The installed version falls into any of these ranges: < 1.9.4, >= 1.10.0 but < 1.10.2, or >= 1.11.0 but < 1.11.1
You are affected if CloudHub module is enabled in cloudcore.yaml AND your KubeEdge version is below the fixed versions (1.9.4, 1.10.2, or 1.11.1).
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 · scoped1.9.41.10.21.11.1
Upgrade KubeEdge to versions 1.11.1, 1.10.2, or 1.9.4 which contain the fix. Alternatively, disable the CloudHub module in cloudcore.yaml as a workaround until the upgrade can be performed.
KubeEdge 1.11.1 (or latest stable 1.x release)
- 1. Identify the current KubeEdge version by checking the CloudCore deployment or running `cloudcore --version`
- 2. Based on the current version, upgrade to the appropriate fixed release: if < 1.9.4 upgrade to 1.9.4 or later; if >= 1.10.0 and < 1.10.2 upgrade to 1.10.2 or later; if >= 1.11.0 and < 1.11.1 upgrade to 1.11.1 or later
- 3. For Kubernetes-based deployments, update the KubeEdge manifests or Helm chart to use the new version and apply with `kubectl apply`
- 4. Verify CloudHub module is running correctly post-upgrade by checking CloudCore logs and ensuring CloudHub is operational
- 5. As an additional precaution, verify the CloudHub module is explicitly enabled/disabled as needed in the cloudcore.yaml configuration
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-31075 — 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-2022-31075 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