Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 1.24% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2022
CVE-2022-1343High confidence
OCSP_basic_verify may incorrectly verify the response signing certificate
OpenSSL · OpenSSL
Official source article: Siemens SSA-398330 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
5.3MediumCVSS 3.1
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Fix availability varies by productMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 28 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs OpenSSL OpenSSL and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 28 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Siemens ProductCERT: 5 affected or under-investigation product states without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Siemens ProductCERT: 1 affected or under-investigation product state without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Siemens ProductCERT: 1 affected or under-investigation product state without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Siemens ProductCERT: 20 affected or under-investigation product states without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
- Siemens ProductCERT: 1 affected or under-investigation product state without a fixed product state in the same current advisory
Distribution package intelligence
7 package statesRelease-specific package status
Alpine, Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpine v3.23v3.23 · main | openssl | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 3.0.3-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Alpine v3.22v3.22 · main | openssl | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 3.0.3-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Alpine v3.21v3.21 · main | openssl | Vendor fix publishedAlpine records a security fix at this version. An absent entry does not mean the package is unaffected. | 3.0.3-r0 | Alpine Security Database ↗Source updated 3 Oct 2026 |
| Debian trixietrixie · source | openssl | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | openssl | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | openssl | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | openssl | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
5 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
SSA-398330 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 18 · interimSiemens ProductCERTSSA-398330: Vulnerabilities in the additional GNU/Linux subsystem of the SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518(F)-4 PN/DP MFP >= V3.1.0 and < V3.1.5
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (6ES7518-4AX00-1AB0)
- SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (6ES7518-4AX00-1AC0)
- SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP (6ES7518-4FX00-1AB0)
- SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP (6ES7518-4FX00-1AC0)
- SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP (6AG1518-4AX00-4AC0)
- Summary
- Under certain circumstances, the command line OCSP verify function reports successful verification when the verification in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result.
- Remediation
- Update to V3.1.5 or later version
SSA-794697 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 9 · interimSiemens ProductCERTSSA-794697: Vulnerabilities in the additional GNU/Linux subsystem of the SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP before V1.1
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP - GNU/Linux subsystem
- Summary
- Under certain circumstances, the command line OCSP verify function reports successful verification when the verification in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result.
- Remediation
- Update to V1.1 or later version
SSA-942865 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 2 · finalSiemens ProductCERTSSA-942865: Multiple Vulnerabilities in the Integrated SCALANCE S615 of SINAMICS Medium Voltage Products
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- SINAMICS PERFECT HARMONY GH180 6SR5
- Summary
- Under certain circumstances, the command line OCSP verify function reports successful verification when the verification in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result.
- Remediation
- Update the firmware of the integrated SCALANCE S615 device to V7.2 or later version
SSA-419740 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 1 · finalSiemens ProductCERTSSA-419740: Multiple Third-Party Component Vulnerabilities in RUGGEDCOM and SCALANCE Products before V7.2
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- RUGGEDCOM RM1224 LTE(4G) EU (6GK6108-4AM00-2BA2)
- RUGGEDCOM RM1224 LTE(4G) NAM (6GK6108-4AM00-2DA2)
- SCALANCE M804PB (6GK5804-0AP00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M812-1 ADSL-Router (Annex A) (6GK5812-1AA00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M812-1 ADSL-Router (Annex B) (6GK5812-1BA00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M816-1 ADSL-Router (Annex A) (6GK5816-1AA00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M816-1 ADSL-Router (Annex B) (6GK5816-1BA00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M826-2 SHDSL-Router (6GK5826-2AB00-2AB2)
- SCALANCE M874-2 (6GK5874-2AA00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M874-3 (6GK5874-3AA00-2AA2)
- SCALANCE M876-3 (EVDO) (6GK5876-3AA02-2BA2)
- SCALANCE M876-3 (ROK) (6GK5876-3AA02-2EA2)
- Summary
- Under certain circumstances, the command line OCSP verify function reports successful verification when the varification in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result.
- Remediation
- Update to V7.2 or later version
SSA-953464 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 1 · finalSiemens ProductCERTSSA-953464: Multiple Vulnerabilites in Siemens Brownfield Connectivity - Client before V2.15
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- Brownfield Connectivity - Client
- Summary
- Under certain circumstances, the command line OCSP verify function reports successful verification when the varification in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result.
- Remediation
- Update to V2.15 or later version Contact customer support to obtain the update
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 28 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
The function `OCSP_basic_verify` verifies the signer certificate on an OCSP response. In the case where the (non-default) flag OCSP_NOCHECKS is used then the response will be positive (meaning a successful verification) even in the case where the response signing certificate fails to verify. It is anticipated that most users of `OCSP_basic_verify` will not use the OCSP_NOCHECKS flag. In this case the `OCSP_basic_verify` function will return a negative value (indicating a fatal error) in the case of a certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. This issue also impacts the command line OpenSSL "ocsp" application. When verifying an ocsp response with the "-no_cert_checks" option the command line application will report that the verification is successful even though it has in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2).
What
The function `OCSP_basic_verify` verifies the signer certificate on an OCSP response. In the case where the (non-default) flag OCSP_NOCHECKS is used then the response will be positive (meaning a successful verification) even in the case where the response signing certificate fails to verify. It is anticipated that most users of `OCSP_basic_verify` will not use the OCSP_NOCHECKS flag. In this case the `OCSP_basic_verify` function will return a negative value (indicating a fatal error) in the case of a certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. This issue also impacts the command line OpenSSL "ocsp" application. When verifying an ocsp response with the "-no_cert_checks" option the command line application will report that the verification is successful even though it has in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2).
Why
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
The function `OCSP_basic_verify` verifies the signer certificate on an OCSP response. In the case where the (non-default) flag OCSP_NOCHECKS is used then the response will be positive (meaning a successful verification) even in the case where the response signing certificate fails to verify. It is anticipated that most users of `OCSP_basic_verify` will not use the OCSP_NOCHECKS flag. In this case the `OCSP_basic_verify` function will return a negative value (indicating a fatal error) in the case of a certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. This issue also impacts the command line OpenSSL "ocsp" application. When verifying an ocsp response with the "-no_cert_checks" option the command line application will report that the verification is successful even though it has in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2).
Why
The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Improper Certificate Validation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-295 ↗
CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation. The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix availability varies by product
- Affected
- Action
- Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 3 May 2022 · Last source change 5 May 2025, 16:42 UTC · CWE-295 · Improper Certificate Validation
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-4552
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Siemens ProductCERT
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Siemens ProductCERT
CWE sourceCISA ADP
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.Siemens ProductCERT ↗
- Before
- Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2) · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- After
- Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2) · Fixed: Update to V3.1.5 or later version
- Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.Siemens ProductCERT ↗
- Before
- Awaiting fix
- After
- Patch available
CVE published
Fixed release recorded from official guidance
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.