Factorytalk Alarms And EventsApplication · Rockwellautomation

CVE-2022-38744

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2022-10-27
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
An unauthenticated attacker with network access to a victim's Rockwell Automation FactoryTalk Alarm and Events service could open a connection, causing the service to fault and become unavailable. The affected port could be used as a server ping port and uses messages structured with XML.

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 confidence

This is a denial-of-service vulnerability in Rockwell Automation FactoryTalk Alarm and Events service. An unauthenticated attacker with network access can open a connection to the affected service port (which functions as a server ping port using XML-structured messages), causing the service to fault and become unavailable.

MitigationRestrict network access to the FactoryTalk Alarm and Events service by implementing firewall rules and network segmentation to limit exposure to only trusted IP addresses; monitor for service availability issues.

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
Factorytalk Alarms And EventsApplication
Affected:all versions

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
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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm FactoryTalk Alarm and Events installation
    Open Windows Services console (services.msc) and look for a service named 'FactoryTalk Alarm and Events' or check Programs and Features for Rockwell Automation FactoryTalk Alarm and Events entry
    Affected if The product is installed on the system
  2. Identify the service executable
    In Services console, right-click the FactoryTalk Alarm and Events service, select Properties, and note the path to the executable (.exe) - typically under C:\Program Files\Rockwell Software\ or similar Rockwell installation directory
    Affected if A FactoryTalk Alarm and Events service executable is found at a Rockwell Software path
  3. Verify the service is listening on a port
    Open Command Prompt and run 'netstat -anob | findstr /i "FactoryTalk"' or use Process Explorer to identify which port the service is bound to; the affected port functions as a server ping port using XML-structured messages
    Affected if The service is actively listening on a TCP port (typically port 4567 or similar, but the specific port varies by configuration)
  4. Assess network exposure of the service port
    Run 'netstat -an' and identify the IP binding for the FactoryTalk service port (0.0.0.0 means exposed to all interfaces); verify firewall rules allow inbound connections to this port from untrusted networks using 'netsh advfirewall firewall show rule name=all'
    Affected if The service port is bound to 0.0.0.0 or an accessible IP and firewall rules permit inbound connections from untrusted sources

If FactoryTalk Alarm and Events is installed and its service port is network-accessible to untrusted hosts, the environment is affected by this CVE.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Restrict network access to the FactoryTalk Alarm and Events service by implementing firewall rules and network segmentation to limit exposure to only trusted IP addresses; monitor for service availability issues.

Fix this in Factorytalk Alarms And Events Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-38744 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-38744 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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