CVE-2022-32507
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered on certain Nuki Home Solutions devices. Some BLE commands, which should have been designed to be only called from privileged accounts, could also be called from unprivileged accounts. This demonstrates that no access controls were implemented for the different BLE commands across the different accounts. This affects Nuki Smart Lock 3.0 before 3.3.5 and Nuki Smart Lock 2.0 before 2.12.4.
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 confidenceNuki Smart Lock devices have a broken access control vulnerability in their BLE (Bluetooth Low Energy) communication protocol. Certain BLE commands that should be restricted to privileged accounts (such as administrative or owner-level functions) can be executed by unprivileged accounts, allowing unauthorized users to access sensitive operations without proper authentication checks.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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.
-
Check Smart Lock firmware versionOpen the Nuki mobile application and navigate to Settings > Smart Lock > Technical Details to view the current firmware version. Alternatively, connect via BLE and read characteristic 0x4b (Device Information) to retrieve the firmware version.Affected if Firmware version is below 3.3.5 for Smart Lock 3.0 or below 2.12.4 for Smart Lock 2.0
-
Confirm device modelIdentify whether the device is a Smart Lock 2.0 or Smart Lock 3.0 by checking the product packaging, purchase documentation, or the Nuki app device information.Affected if Device is a Smart Lock 2.0 with firmware below 2.12.4, or a Smart Lock 3.0 with firmware below 3.3.5
-
Verify BLE is enabledCheck in the Nuki app under Settings > Smart Lock > Administration > Bluetooth that BLE communication is turned on. The vulnerability requires active BLE communication to be exploitable.Affected if BLE is enabled and the firmware version is in the vulnerable range
You are affected if your Nuki Smart Lock 2.0 runs firmware below 2.12.4 or Smart Lock 3.0 runs firmware below 3.3.5, and BLE communication is active.
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 · scopedUpdate Nuki Smart Lock 3.0 to firmware version 3.3.5 or later and Nuki Smart Lock 2.0 to version 2.12.4 or later to address the missing access control implementation.
Nuki Smart Lock 3.0 to version 3.3.5 or later; Nuki Smart Lock 2.0 to version 2.12.4 or later
- Check the current firmware version of the Nuki Smart Lock device
- Update the Nuki Smart Lock 3.0 firmware to version 3.3.5 or later
- Update the Nuki Smart Lock 2.0 firmware to version 2.12.4 or later
- Verify the firmware update was successful
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-32507 — 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-2022-32507 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