CVE-2022-29246: Potential buffer overflow in function DFU upload in Azure RTOS USBX
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Plan (action score 40/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 2.4% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 84.1% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Add it to your regular patch cycle. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Azure RTOS USBX is a USB host, device, and on-the-go (OTG) embedded stack. Prior to version 6.1.11, he USBX DFU UPLOAD functionality may be utilized to introduce a buffer overflow resulting in overwrite of memory contents. In particular cases this may allow an attacker to bypass security features or execute arbitrary code. The implementation of `ux_device_class_dfu_control_request` function does not assure that a buffer overflow will not occur during handling of the DFU UPLOAD command. When an attacker issues the `UX_SLAVE_CLASS_DFU_COMMAND_UPLOAD` control transfer request with `wLenght` larger than the buffer size (`UX_SLAVE_REQUEST_CONTROL_MAX_LENGTH`, 256 bytes), depending on the actual implementation of `dfu -> ux_slave_class_dfu_read`, a buffer overflow may occur. In example `ux_slave_class_dfu_read` may read 4096 bytes (or more up to 65k) to a 256 byte buffer ultimately resulting in an overflow. Furthermore in case an attacker has some control over the read flash memory, this may result in execution of arbitrary code and platform compromise. A fix for this issue has been included in USBX release 6.1.11. As a workaround, align request and buffer size to assure that buffer boundaries are respected.
- Published
- May 24, 2022
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 2.4% · 84th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-120
Report tools
Action score
40
Plan
Add it to your regular patch cycle.
- CVSS
- 39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 2.4%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 9.8
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 9.8
- agree
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| eclipse | threadx usbx | cpe:2.3:a:eclipse:threadx_usbx |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- eclipse threadx usbxbefore 6.1.11
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
azure-rtos usbx
- < 6.1.11affected
Same product
eclipse: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-36063USBX Host CDC ECM integer underflow with buffer overflow40Plan
- CVE-2023-48698Azure RTOS USBX Remote Code Execution Vulnerability39Monitor
- CVE-2023-48697Azure RTOS USBX Remote Code Execution Vulnerability39Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2022-29223May 24, 2022 · Buffer overflow on HUB descriptor in Azure RTOS USBX39Monitor
- Later →CVE-2022-39293Oct 13, 2022 · Azure RTOS USBX Host PIMA vulnerable to read integer underflow with buffer overflow39Monitor
- Later →CVE-2023-48694Dec 4, 2023 · Azure RTOS USBX Remote Code Execution Vulnerability39Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-120 · Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
When data is copied, the source length is not compared with the size of the destination buffer. Excess data overwrites adjacent memory.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-120 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
char buf[256];
memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);Fixed
char buf[256];
if (pkt->len > sizeof(buf)) {
return -EINVAL;
}
memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Overflow BuffersCAPEC-100likelihood: High · Very High
- Client-side Injection-induced Buffer OverflowCAPEC-14likelihood: Medium · High
- Filter Failure through Buffer OverflowCAPEC-24likelihood: High · High
- MIME ConversionCAPEC-42likelihood: High · High
- Overflow Binary Resource FileCAPEC-44likelihood: High · Very High
- Buffer Overflow via Symbolic LinksCAPEC-45likelihood: High · High
- Overflow Variables and TagsCAPEC-46likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.