CVE-2022-34884
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 · uneditedA buffer overflow exists in the Remote Presence subsystem which can potentially allow valid, authenticated users to cause a recoverable subsystem denial of service.
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 · low confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Remote Presence subsystem that can be exploited by valid, authenticated users to cause a recoverable denial of service condition.
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< 1.80_afbt20n< 5.20_tei3c8m< 3.60_tei386m< 8.40-cdi394n< 8.40-cdi394n< 8.40-cdi394n< 8.40-cdi394n< 8.40-cdi394nCVSS 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.
-
Identify Thinkagile modelLocate the model number on the physical device chassis or in the system management interface. Confirm it is one of the following: Vx3331, Hx Enclosure Certified Node, Hx1021, Hx1320, Hx1321, Hx1520 R, Hx1521 R, or Hx2320 E.Affected if The model is any of the listed affected Thinkagile products.
-
Check installed firmware versionAccess the system management interface (BMC/IMM) and navigate to the firmware or system information section. Record the current firmware version string.Affected if The firmware version is lower than the threshold for your model: Vx3331 < 1.80_afbt20n, Hx Enclosure Certified Node < 5.20_tei3c8m, Hx1021 < 3.60_tei386m, Hx1320/Hx1321/Hx1520 R/Hx1521 R/Hx2320 E < 8.40-cdi394n.
-
Confirm Remote Presence subsystem is accessibleCheck if the Remote Presence (also known as remote console/remote management) feature is enabled in the BMC or management interface settings.Affected if Remote Presence subsystem is enabled and accessible to authenticated users on the network.
-
Review user accounts with management accessList all user accounts that have privileges to access the Remote Presence or remote management functions through the BMC interface.Affected if There are authenticated users configured who can access the Remote Presence subsystem.
You are affected if you have a Thinkagile model from the list with firmware version below the specified threshold and Remote Presence is accessible to authenticated users.
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 · scoped1.80_afbt20n3.60_tei386m5.20_tei3c8m
Since authenticated users can trigger this issue, organizations should review user access privileges and consider network segmentation to limit exposure to trusted personnel only; contact the vendor for patch information.
Thinkagile Vx3331: firmware 1.80_afbt20n | Thinkagile Hx Enclosure Certified Node: firmware 5.20_tei3c8m | Thinkagile Hx1021: firmware 3.60_tei386m | Thinkagile Hx1320/Hx1321/Hx1520 R/Hx1521 R/Hx2320 E: firmware 8.40-cdi394n
- 1. Identify the exact Thinkagile model from the list: Vx3331, Hx Enclosure Certified Node, Hx1021, Hx1320, Hx1321, Hx1520 R, Hx1521 R, or Hx2320 E
- 2. Visit the Lenovo support portal at support.lenovo.com
- 3. Search for the specific model and navigate to the Drivers & Downloads or Firmware section
- 4. Locate the Remote Presence subsystem firmware update
- 5. Download and apply the appropriate fixed firmware version for your model: Vx3331 users: upgrade to 1.80_afbt20n or later; Hx Enclosure Certified Node users: upgrade to 5.20_tei3c8m or later; Hx1021 users: upgrade to 3.60_tei386m or later; Hx1320, Hx1321, Hx1520 R, Hx1521 R, Hx2320 E users: upgrade to 8.40-cdi394n or later
- 6. Verify the firmware installation was successful and the Remote Presence subsystem is functioning normally
- 7. After upgrade, confirm the buffer overflow vulnerability is resolved by checking system logs for any related errors
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-34884 — 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-2022-34884 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