CVE-2022-23948VulnerabilityPublished 21 Sep 2022Updated 29 May 2025

CVE-2022-23948: keylime · Information Exposure

Affects keylimeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 6.3.0 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 1.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 73% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 6.3.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
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: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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 Sep 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 2026-10-25.

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 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 keylime/keylime to 6.3.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubkeylime/keylime`pkg:github/keylime/keylime`Other threats	Affected <6.3.0	Fixed in 6.3.0

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately assess their use of Keylime and identify any deployments running versions prior to 6.3.0. The primary mitigation is to upgrade Keylime agents and servers to version 6.3.0 or later, where the mount verification logic has been corrected. Additionally, organizations should implement strict mount namespace isolation and restrict the ability for unprivileged users or processes to create mounts that could interfere with security checks. Employing mandatory access controls (e.g., SELinux, AppArmor) to limit mount operations and monitoring mount points for unauthorized changes can provide additional defense layers. Regular audits of the host environment to detect suspicious mounts or processes accessing sensitive files should be conducted. Network segmentation and limiting access to hosts running Keylime agents can reduce exposure. Finally, organizations should review and enhance their key management and secret storage practices to minimize the impact of potential leaks, including using hardware security modules (HSMs) or secure enclaves where feasible.

Description

A flaw was found in Keylime before 6.3.0. The logic in the Keylime agent for checking for a secure mount can be fooled by previously created unprivileged mounts allowing secrets to be leaked to other processes on the host.

Impact

For European organizations, especially those operating cloud infrastructure, edge computing, or environments relying on Keylime for host attestation and security, this vulnerability poses a serious risk of unauthorized disclosure of sensitive cryptographic material. Such exposure could lead to further compromise of secure communications, authentication tokens, or encryption keys, undermining the trustworthiness of the entire security framework. Organizations in sectors like finance, healthcare, critical infrastructure, and government, which often deploy Keylime or similar attestation tools to enforce security policies, could face regulatory and compliance repercussions under GDPR and other data protection laws if sensitive data is leaked. The breach of confidentiality could also facilitate lateral movement by attackers within networks, increasing the risk of broader compromise. Given the vulnerability does not require privileges or user interaction, attackers could exploit it remotely, increasing the threat surface. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests that timely patching can effectively mitigate risk, but delayed remediation could expose organizations to targeted attacks.

CWE-200Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #20OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (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
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Echo Request Ping (opens in a new tab)
TCP SYN Scan (opens in a new tab)
Enumerate Mail Exchange (MX) Records (opens in a new tab)
DNS Zone Transfers (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 7 Jul 2025, 22:55 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-200

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats