CVE-2022-23950VulnerabilityPublished 21 Sep 2022Updated 27 May 2025

CVE-2022-23950: keylime · CWE-379

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: 1.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 76% 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:N/I:N/A:H

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

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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

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

To mitigate CVE-2022-23950, European organizations should upgrade Keylime to version 6.3.0 or later, where the vulnerability has been addressed. If immediate upgrading is not feasible, organizations should implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Restrict access to the /tmp directory or the specific socket path by adjusting filesystem permissions and using mount options like 'noexec' or 'nodev' where appropriate to limit unprivileged user interference. 2) Employ mandatory access controls (e.g., SELinux, AppArmor) to confine Keylime processes and prevent unauthorized socket creation or manipulation. 3) Monitor the /tmp directory for unexpected socket files or changes, using file integrity monitoring tools to detect potential exploitation attempts. 4) Consider running Keylime components under dedicated service accounts with minimal privileges and isolated runtime environments to reduce the attack surface. 5) If possible, configure Keylime to use alternative socket paths outside of /tmp or use randomized socket names to avoid predictable resource conflicts. 6) Educate system administrators about the risk and ensure that local user accounts are tightly controlled and monitored to reduce the risk of insider threats exploiting this vulnerability. These targeted mitigations go beyond generic advice by focusing on filesystem permissions, process confinement, and monitoring specific to the nature of the vulnerability.

Description

In Keylime before 6.3.0, Revocation Notifier uses a fixed /tmp path for UNIX domain socket which can allow unprivileged users a method to prohibit keylime operations.

Impact

For European organizations deploying Keylime in their cloud or edge infrastructure, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to the availability of their remote attestation and integrity verification processes. Keylime is often used in environments requiring high trust and security assurance, such as government agencies, critical infrastructure providers, and enterprises with sensitive data. Disruption of Keylime operations could lead to a loss of confidence in system integrity monitoring, potentially allowing compromised or untrusted systems to operate undetected. This could indirectly increase the risk of further attacks or data breaches. Moreover, denial of service conditions could impact operational continuity, especially in automated or large-scale deployments relying on Keylime for security enforcement. Since the vulnerability can be exploited by any local unprivileged user, insider threats or attackers who have gained limited access could leverage this to disrupt security controls. Although confidentiality and integrity are not directly impacted, the availability impact is critical in security-sensitive contexts. European organizations subject to strict regulatory requirements around system integrity and availability, such as those under NIS2 Directive or GDPR (where availability is a component of data protection), may face compliance and operational challenges if this vulnerability is exploited.

CWE-379Creation of Temporary File in Directory with Insecure Permissions (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: LowOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product creates a temporary file in a directory whose permissions allow unintended actors to determine the file's existence or otherwise access that file.
Requirements
Many contemporary languages have functions which properly handle this condition. Older C temp file functions are especially susceptible.
Implementation
Try to store sensitive tempfiles in a directory which is not world readable -- i.e., per-user directories.
Implementation
Avoid using vulnerable temp file functions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (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 6 Jul 2025, 02:10 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-379

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats