CVE-2022-30315

CRITICALNVD 9.89.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 9.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: CRITICAL) published 2022-07-29. NVD baseline CVSS 9.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3

Also known asEUVD-2022-52264 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

9.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan mitigationNo fix is confirmed yet: check with the vendor for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system on your normal schedule (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 1.0%CVSS: 9.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

No fix is confirmed yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for the fix.

Honeywell Experion PKS Safety Manager (SM and FSC) through 2022-05-06 has Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity. According to FSCT-2022-0053, there is a Honeywell Experion PKS Safety Manager insufficient logic security controls issue. The affected components are characterized as: Honeywell FSC runtime (FSC-CPU, QPP), Honeywell Safety Builder. The potential impact is: Remote Code Execution, Denial of Service. The Honeywell Experion PKS Safety Manager family of safety controllers utilize the unauthenticated Safety Builder protocol (FSCT-2022-0051) for engineering purposes, including downloading projects and control logic to the controller. Control logic is downloaded to the controller on a block-by-block basis. The logic that is downloaded consists of FLD code compiled to native machine code for the CPU module (which applies to both the Safety Manager and FSC families). Since this logic does not seem to be cryptographically authenticated, it allows an attacker capable of triggering a logic download to execute arbitrary machine code on the controller's CPU module in the context of the runtime. While the researchers could not verify this in detail, the researchers believe that the microprocessor underpinning the FSC and Safety Manager CPU modules is incapable of offering memory protection or privilege separation capabilities which would give an attacker full control of the CPU module. There is no authentication on control logic downloaded to the controller. Memory protection and privilege separation capabilities for the runtime are possibly lacking. The researchers confirmed the issues in question on Safety Manager R145.1 and R152.2 but suspect the issue affects all FSC and SM controllers and associated Safety Builder versions regardless of software or firmware revision. An attacker who can communicate with a Safety Manager controller via the Safety Builder protocol can execute arbitrary code without restrictions on the CPU module, allowing for covert manipulation of control operations and implanting capabilities similar to the TRITON malware (MITRE ATT&CK software ID S1009). A mitigating factor with regards to some, but not all, of the above functionality is that these require the Safety Manager physical keyswitch to be in the right position.

CVSS v3
9.8
EG Score
9.8CRITICALmedium confidence
EG Risk
44
EG Risk 44/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity98% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 9.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation1.0% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: No fix is confirmed yet. Check with the vendor for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system on your normal schedule.
EPSS PROB
1.0%
EPSS %ILE
62nd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (9.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
9.8 CRITICALCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
1.0% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

No fix is confirmed yet. Check with the vendor for a fixed release; until one is applied, restrict network exposure of the affected system on your normal schedule.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

July 28, 2022

Last Modified

November 21, 2024

Advisory Details (2)

Auto-updated Oct 11, 2026
No fix on record yet. Sources: cisa.
Web page

Blog - Forescout

https://www.forescout.com/blog/

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 14× in last 7d / 63× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 284 rows on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. None are among the latest 100 rows. The 184 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-13 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  2. 2026-11-13 07:11 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  3. 2026-11-13 07:11 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  4. 2026-11-12 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  5. 2026-11-12 08:43 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  6. 2026-11-12 08:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  7. 2026-11-11 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  8. 2026-11-11 10:19 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  9. 2026-11-11 10:19 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  10. 2026-11-10 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  11. 2026-11-10 11:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-11-10 11:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  13. 2026-11-09 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  14. 2026-11-09 13:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-09 13:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  16. 2026-11-08 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  17. 2026-11-08 15:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  18. 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  19. 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  20. 2026-11-07 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  21. 2026-11-06 18:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-11-06 18:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  23. 2026-11-06 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  24. 2026-11-05 19:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  25. 2026-11-05 19:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-11-05 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  2. 2026-11-04 21:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  3. 2026-11-04 21:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  4. 2026-11-04 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  5. 2026-11-03 23:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  6. 2026-11-03 23:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  7. 2026-11-03 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  8. 2026-11-03 00:37 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  9. 2026-11-03 00:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  10. 2026-11-02 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  11. 2026-11-02 02:13 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-11-02 02:13 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  13. 2026-11-01 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  14. 2026-11-01 03:50 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-01 03:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  16. 2026-10-31 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  17. 2026-10-31 05:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  18. 2026-10-31 05:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  19. 2026-10-30 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  20. 2026-10-30 07:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  21. 2026-10-30 07:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  22. 2026-10-29 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  23. 2026-10-29 08:38 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  24. 2026-10-29 08:38 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  25. 2026-10-28 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  26. 2026-10-28 10:12 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  27. 2026-10-28 10:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  28. 2026-10-27 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  29. 2026-10-27 10:52 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  30. 2026-10-27 10:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  31. 2026-10-26 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  32. 2026-10-26 12:28 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  33. 2026-10-26 12:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  34. 2026-10-25 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  35. 2026-10-25 14:00 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  36. 2026-10-25 14:00 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  37. 2026-10-24 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  38. 2026-10-24 15:36 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  39. 2026-10-23 17:12 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  40. 2026-10-23 17:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  41. 2026-10-23 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  42. 2026-10-22 18:43 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  43. 2026-10-22 18:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  44. 2026-10-22 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  45. 2026-10-21 20:16 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  46. 2026-10-21 20:16 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  47. 2026-10-21 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 62nd percentile
  48. 2026-10-20 21:52 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  49. 2026-10-20 21:52 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  50. 2026-10-20 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  51. 2026-10-19 23:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  52. 2026-10-19 23:29 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  53. 2026-10-19 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  54. 2026-10-18 22:53 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  55. 2026-10-18 22:53 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  56. 2026-10-18 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  57. 2026-10-18 08:36 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  58. 2026-10-18 00:21 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  59. 2026-10-18 00:21 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  60. 2026-10-17 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  61. 2026-10-17 01:49 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  62. 2026-10-17 01:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  63. 2026-10-16 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  64. 2026-10-16 02:12 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  65. 2026-10-16 02:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  66. 2026-10-15 16:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  67. 2026-10-14 22:06 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  68. 2026-10-14 22:05 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  69. 2026-10-14 22:04 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  70. 2026-10-14 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 61st percentile
  71. 2026-10-13 17:46 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  72. 2026-10-13 17:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8
  73. 2026-10-13 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 60th percentile
  74. 2026-10-12 18:38 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  75. 2026-10-12 18:37 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-rqm7-h39v-q6cr · GitHub severity CRITICAL · GitHub CVSS 9.8

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2022-30315?
CVE-2022-30315 is a critical-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on July 28, 2022. Honeywell Experion PKS Safety Manager (SM and FSC) through 2022-05-06 has Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity. According to FSCT-2022-0053, there is a Honeywell Experion PKS Safety Manager insufficient logic security controls issue. The affected components are characterized as: Honeywell…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2022-30315 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2022-30315 was published on July 28, 2022. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of November 21, 2024; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2022-30315 actively exploited?
CVE-2022-30315 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 1.0% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (62nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2022-30315?
CVE-2022-30315 has a CVSS v3 base score of 9.8 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2022-30315?
No fix for CVE-2022-30315 is confirmed yet. Until one is published, restrict network exposure of the affected system — for example, keep it off the internet or limit it to trusted networks — and watch for a fix.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2022-30315

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2022-30315?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.