VulnerabilityPublished 21 Feb 2022Updated 9 Jun 2025

CVE-2022-0563: util-linux · CWE-209

Affects util-linuxSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium : upgrade to 2.37.4 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 37% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.37.4

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 21 Feb 2022
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade the Red Hat util-linux package to 2.37.4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hatutil-linux`pkg:rpm/util-linux`Other threats	Affected <2.37.4	Fixed in 2.37.4

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, European organizations should prioritize upgrading util-linux to version 2.37.4 or later, where the issue is resolved. In environments where immediate upgrade is not feasible, administrators should consider restricting access to the chfn and chsh utilities to trusted users only, using file permissions or access control mechanisms. Additionally, environment variables such as INPUTRC should be sanitized or restricted to prevent untrusted users from influencing them. Monitoring and auditing usage of these utilities can help detect suspicious activity. Employing mandatory access controls (e.g., SELinux, AppArmor) to limit the ability of unprivileged users to execute or manipulate these utilities can further reduce risk. Finally, organizations should review and harden local user permissions and consider isolating critical systems to minimize the impact of potential local exploits.

Description

A flaw was found in the util-linux chfn and chsh utilities when compiled with Readline support. The Readline library uses an "INPUTRC" environment variable to get a path to the library config file. When the library cannot parse the specified file, it prints an error message containing data from the file. This flaw allows an unprivileged user to read root-owned files, potentially leading to privilege escalation. This flaw affects util-linux versions prior to 2.37.4.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily in environments where util-linux is deployed with Readline support and where users have local access to systems running vulnerable versions. The ability for an unprivileged user to read root-owned files can lead to exposure of sensitive configuration files, credentials, or other critical data, potentially enabling further privilege escalation or lateral movement within the network. This is particularly concerning for organizations with multi-user Linux servers, shared hosting environments, or critical infrastructure systems relying on util-linux utilities. Although the vulnerability does not directly impact integrity or availability, the confidentiality breach can undermine trust, compliance with data protection regulations such as GDPR, and overall system security posture. The medium severity and local attack vector limit the scope to insider threats or attackers with initial foothold, but the potential to escalate privileges makes it a significant concern for sensitive environments.

CWE-209Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product generates an error message that includes sensitive information about its environment, users, or associated data.
Implementation
Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended).
Implementation
Handle exceptions internally and do not display errors containing potentially sensitive information to a user.
Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Use naming conventions and strong types to make it easier to spot when sensitive data is being used. When creating structures, objects, or other complex entities, separate the sensitive and non-sensitive data as much as possible.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Fuzzing for application mapping (opens in a new tab)
Padding Oracle Crypto Attack (opens in a new tab)
Query System for Information (opens in a new tab)
Blind SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Jul 2025, 20:48 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-209

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats