CVE-2022-46142
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 · uneditedAffected devices store the CLI user passwords encrypted in flash memory. Attackers with physical access to the device could retrieve the file and decrypt the CLI user passwords.
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 confidenceAffected devices store CLI user passwords in encrypted form within flash memory. An attacker with physical access to the device can extract the password file from flash and decrypt the stored passwords, likely due to weak or flawed encryption implementation.
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
- Physical
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L
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 device model and firmware versionLocate the device label or access the web interface/cli to confirm the exact model number (e.g., Ruggedcom Rm1224, Scalance M804pb, M812, M816, M826, M874-2, M874-3) and current firmware version.Affected if The device matches any of the listed affected products (all versions of Rm1224, M804pb, M812, M816, M826, M874-2, M874-3).
-
Locate password storage file in flash memoryAccess the device's flash memory (typically via JTAG, UART console, or by reading the flash chip directly if physically accessible). Look for configuration files such as config.txt, user.cfg, or similar files that store CLI user credentials.Affected if A password file exists in flash memory and contains user credential data.
-
Examine password entries for encrypted formatOpen the password file and inspect the password field. Check if passwords appear as Base64 strings, hex-encoded ciphertext, or other reversible encrypted formats rather than salted password hashes (e.g., bcrypt, scrypt, or salted SHA).Affected if Passwords are stored in an encrypted (reversible) format such as Base64-encoded ciphertext, indicating reversible encryption rather than secure hashing.
-
Verify physical access to flash chipConfirm that the flash memory chip storing the configuration is physically accessible on the device board and can be read with standard equipment (SOIC clip, flash programmer, or logic analyzer).Affected if The flash chip is directly readable, allowing an attacker with physical access to extract the password file.
If the device is one of the affected Siemens Ruggedcom or Scalance models and stores CLI passwords in reversible encrypted form in accessible flash memory, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataImplement strong encryption (e.g., AES-256 with proper key derivation) or use salted password hashing instead of reversible encryption; restrict physical access to devices; consider additional authentication layers.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-46142 — 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-2022-46142 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