CVE-2022-38692
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 BootROM, there is a missing size check for RSA keys in Certificate Type 0 validation. This could lead to memory buffer overflow without requiring additional execution privileges.
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 · moderate confidenceIn BootROM, Certificate Type 0 validation lacks proper size checking for RSA keys, which can trigger a memory buffer overflow. This occurs at the earliest stage of device boot without requiring additional execution privileges, making exploitation straightforward.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Identify BootROM-based device architectureDetermine if the target device uses BootROM for initial boot processing. This is typically found in embedded systems, SoCs, or hardware with early-stage boot validation. Consult device documentation or hardware specifications.Affected if The device implements BootROM-based early boot validation using Certificate Type 0 with RSA keys.
-
Verify if RSA-based certificate validation is enabledCheck device boot configuration or secure boot settings to determine if RSA-signed certificates are used during the BootROM stage. This may be visible in UEFI settings, secure boot logs, or vendor documentation.Affected if RSA-signed Certificate Type 0 processing is active in the boot chain.
-
Inspect boot logs for certificate processingReview early boot logs, JTAG debug output, or secure boot audit logs for Certificate Type 0 handling. Look for entries indicating RSA key validation or certificate chain verification during ROM boot.Affected if Boot logs show Certificate Type 0 RSA key validation occurring without apparent size bounds checking.
-
Confirm vendor patch statusCheck the device manufacturer or chip vendor for available BootROM firmware updates addressing CVE-2022-38692. Review security advisories, release notes, or firmware changelogs for mentions of RSA key size validation fixes.Affected if No vendor patch for BootROM RSA key size validation has been applied, or the installed BootROM version predates the fix.
A device is affected if it uses BootROM with RSA-based Certificate Type 0 processing and has not received a vendor firmware update that implements proper RSA key size bounds checking.
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-provided BootROM firmware updates that implement proper RSA key size validation in Certificate Type 0 processing; until patched, isolate affected devices from untrusted certificate sources.
- Consultation8.0 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 $6,592.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-38692 — 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-2022-38692 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