CVE-2022-48360
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 · uneditedThe facial recognition module has a vulnerability in file permission control. Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may affect confidentiality.
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 confidenceThis vulnerability involves improper file permission controls within a facial recognition module. The weak file permissions could allow unauthorized users to access sensitive files such as biometric data, trained models, or configuration files, potentially compromising confidentiality of the facial recognition data.
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= 12.0.0= 13.0.0= 2.0.0= 2.1.0= 3.0.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 your HarmonyOS or EMUI versionGo to Settings > About Phone (or System > About Device) and locate the version number under 'Version' or 'HarmonyOS version' / 'EMUI version'Affected if The version displayed matches 12.0.0 or 13.0.0 for EMUI, or 2.0.0, 2.1.0, or 3.0.0 for HarmonyOS
-
Confirm facial recognition is configuredNavigate to Settings > Security > Face Recognition (or Settings > Apps > Face Recognition) and check if any facial data is enrolled or the feature is enabledAffected if Facial recognition is enrolled or enabled on the device
-
Check facial recognition data file permissionsUsing a file manager with root access or ADB shell, navigate to the facial recognition data directory (typically under /data or /data/huawei) and list permissions with 'ls -la' command on files in the biometric data folderAffected if File permissions on facial recognition data, models, or configuration files show read/write access for unauthorized users or groups (for example, permissions like 777 or world-readable files)
-
Inspect biometric data storage permissionsCheck the file permissions on directories storing biometric templates or facial recognition models using 'ls -ld' command on folders such as /data/biometric or /data/faceauthAffected if The directory permissions allow access by non-privileged users or applications (world-readable or group-readable with weak restrictions)
You are affected if your device runs one of the listed HarmonyOS or EMUI versions AND facial recognition is enabled AND file permissions on facial recognition data files are overly permissive (world-readable or accessible by unauthorized 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.
From vendor dataImplement proper file permission controls by restricting access to sensitive files in the facial recognition module to authorized users and processes only, following the principle of least privilege.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $3,440.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-48360 — 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-2022-48360 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