CVE-2022-29931VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jun 2022Updated 30 May 2025

CVE-2022-29931: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 46% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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).
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted 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.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 25 Jun 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 2026-10-26.

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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
n/a n/a	Affected =7.2.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately verify if they are running Raytion Custom Security Manager version 7.2.0 and restrict access to the administration interface to trusted networks and users only. Implement web application firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block reflected XSS attack patterns targeting the administration interface. Educate administrators about the risks of clicking untrusted links and encourage the use of multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the impact of credential theft. If vendor patches or updates become available, prioritize their deployment. In the absence of patches, consider deploying content security policy (CSP) headers to restrict the execution of unauthorized scripts in the browser. Regularly audit and monitor administrative access logs for suspicious activity. Additionally, isolate the administration interface from general user networks and enforce strict input validation and output encoding on all user-supplied data within the interface if customization is possible.

Description

The administration interface of the Raytion Custom Security Manager (Raytion CSM) in Version 7.2.0 allows reflected Cross-site Scripting (XSS).

Impact

For European organizations using Raytion Custom Security Manager 7.2.0, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to the confidentiality and integrity of administrative sessions. An attacker could craft a malicious URL or link that, when clicked by an administrator, executes arbitrary JavaScript in their browser. This could lead to session hijacking, theft of administrative credentials, or unauthorized actions performed with the administrator's privileges. Given that the administration interface is a critical control point for security management, exploitation could undermine the overall security posture of the affected organization. The reflected XSS does not directly impact availability but could facilitate further attacks or unauthorized access. European organizations with sensitive or regulated data, such as those in finance, healthcare, or critical infrastructure, could face compliance and reputational risks if administrative accounts are compromised. The requirement for user interaction reduces the likelihood of automated exploitation but does not eliminate risk, especially if phishing or social engineering tactics are employed.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jul 2025, 15:41 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats