Skip to content
Noroxi
NVD / CVE Program· CNA mitre

CVE-2022-31207: The Omron SYSMAC Cx product family PLCs (CS series, CJ series, and CP series) through 2022-05-18 lack cryptographic authentication.

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 39/100)

  • 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: 0.99% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 62.5% 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 the record, no fixed version is available yet.
  • Mentioned 1 time in Turkish national cyber security advisories (siberguvenlik.gov.tr).

Low priority for now. 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

The Omron SYSMAC Cx product family PLCs (CS series, CJ series, and CP series) through 2022-05-18 lack cryptographic authentication. They utilize the Omron FINS (9600/TCP) protocol for engineering purposes, including downloading projects and control logic to the PLC. This protocol has authentication flaws as reported in FSCT-2022-0057. Control logic is downloaded to PLC volatile memory using the FINS Program Area Read and Program Area Write commands or to non-volatile memory using other commands from where it can be loaded into volatile memory for execution. The logic that is loaded into and executed from the user program area exists in compiled object code form. Upon execution, these object codes are first passed to a dedicated ASIC that determines whether the object code is to be executed by the ASIC or the microprocessor. In the former case, the object code is interpreted by the ASIC whereas in the latter case the object code is passed to the microprocessor for object code interpretation by a ROM interpreter. In the abnormal case where the object code cannot be handled by either, an abnormal condition is triggered and the PLC is halted. The logic that is downloaded to the PLC does not seem to be cryptographically authenticated, thus allowing an attacker to manipulate transmitted object code to the PLC and either execute arbitrary object code commands on the ASIC or on the microprocessor interpreter.

CriticalCVSS 9.8 · v3.1—No exploit No fix recorded
Published
Jul 26, 2022
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
0.9% · 62th percentile

Report tools

JSON

Action score

39

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.9%

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.

Follow CVE-2022-31207

When you'll hear from us

  • when it enters CISA KEV
  • when exploit code appears or is weaponized
  • when the record is updated (including a fixed version)
  • when EPSS rises 20 points in a week

One daily email digest (06:00 UTC); connect a webhook for KEV listings and weaponized exploits instantly.

Your free account also gets you

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

  • Stack alerts: add the products and versions you run, get the new CVEs that affect them
  • Uptime monitoring: 1 site, instant email when it goes down
  • Add your domain: subdomains and takeover risk scanned every week (1 domain)
  • 10 scans an hour on the security tools (3 a day without an account), an API key and MCP
  • All your scans in one panel: findings, what changed in the last scan, a report per domain or per client (PDF, share link)
All free tools

Sign up with email · Have an account? Sign in

Free account, no card. Unfollow any time.

Don't want an account? Get "Exploited this week" by email every MondayDon't want an account? RSS feed for omron records

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

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 help

Affected 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.

VendorProduct
omronsysmac cs1 firmware
omronsysmac cs1
omronsysmac cj2m firmware
omronsysmac cj2m
omronsysmac cj2h firmware
omronsysmac cj2h
omronsysmac cp1e firmware
omronsysmac cp1e
omronsysmac cp1h firmware
omronsysmac cp1h
omronsysmac cp1l firmware
omronsysmac cp1l

and 2 more

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • omron cp1w-cif41 firmwareall versions
  • omron sysmac cj2h firmwarebefore 1.5
  • omron sysmac cj2m firmwarebefore 2.1
  • omron sysmac cp1e firmwarebefore 1.30
  • omron sysmac cp1h firmwarebefore 1.30
  • omron sysmac cp1l firmwarebefore 1.10
  • omron sysmac cs1 firmwarebefore 4.1

Same product

omron: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2022-31205In Omron CS series, CJ series, and CP series PLCs through 2022-05-18, the password for access to the Web UI is stored in memory area D1449..
    30Monitor
  • CVE-2022-31204Omron CS series, CJ series, and CP series PLCs through 2022-05-18 use cleartext passwords.
    30Monitor

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.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

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 researchers

Finders, 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).

National notice (Türkiye Cybersecurity Directorate / USOM)

Official security notices citing this record; remediation advice is on the agency's page.

All national notices →

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-347 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

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

The verifier takes the algorithm to verify with from the token’s own header. Untrusted data ends up deciding its own verification rule.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-347 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

ts
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey);

Fixed

ts
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey, {  algorithms: ["RS256"],  issuer: "https://id.example.com",  audience: "portal",});

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

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 (1 more)

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records