CVE-2022-41807
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 · uneditedMissing authorization vulnerability exists in Kyocera Document Solutions MFPs and printers, which may allow a network-adjacent attacker to alter the product settings without authentication by sending a specially crafted request. Affected products/versions are as follows: TASKalfa 7550ci/6550ci, TASKalfa 5550ci/4550ci/3550ci/3050ci, TASKalfa 255c/205c, TASKalfa 256ci/206ci, ECOSYS M6526cdn/M6526cidn, FS-C2126MFP/C2126MFP+/C2026MFP/C2026MFP+, TASKalfa 8000i/6500i, TASKalfa 5500i/4500i/3500i, TASKalfa 305/255, TASKalfa 306i/256i, LS-3140MFP/3140MFP+/3640MFP, ECOSYS M2535dn, LS-1135MFP/1035MFP, LS-C8650DN/C8600DN, ECOSYS P6026cdn, FS-C5250DN, LS-4300DN/4200DN/2100DN, ECOSYS P4040dn, ECOSYS P2135dn, and FS-1370DN.
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 confidenceMissing authorization vulnerability in Kyocera MFPs and printers allows a network-adjacent attacker to alter device settings without authentication by sending specially crafted requests. The vulnerability affects multiple TASKalfa and ECOSYS models, enabling unauthorized configuration changes.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
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 the device modelAccess the device web interface or check the device label/display to confirm the exact model number (e.g., Taskalfa 7550ci, 6550ci, 5550ci, 4550ci, 3550ci, 3050ci, 255c, or 205c)Affected if The model matches one of the eight affected TASKalfa variants listed in the CVE
-
Confirm network accessibilityVerify the device has an IP address and is reachable on the network using ping or network scan toolsAffected if The device is network-accessible, making it potentially exploitable by a network-adjacent attacker
-
Check web interface exposureAccess the device's web management interface by entering its IP address in a browser (typically HTTP/HTTPS on ports 80 or 443)Affected if The web interface is accessible without immediate forced authentication prompts
-
Test for unauthenticated configuration accessAttempt to access device configuration pages or API endpoints directly via HTTP requests (e.g., /printer/index.html or similar administrative paths) without providing credentialsAffected if Configuration pages load or accept requests without requiring authentication
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 dataRestrict network access to affected devices by implementing network segmentation and firewall rules; apply vendor patches when available and monitor for unauthorized configuration changes.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-41807 — 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-2022-41807 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