BlackTreeIndependent security intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2022
CVE-2022-35929High confidence

False positive signature verification in cosign

sigstore · cosign

7.1HighCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Within 7 days

High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Select the national-authority views to include. The exact source language is shown on each matched advisory. Your choice is remembered on this device and encoded in the shareable URL.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2022-6632

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionWithin 7 days

High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

cosign is a container signing and verification utility. In versions prior to 1.10.1 cosign can report a false positive if any attestation exists. `cosign verify-attestation` used with the `--type` flag will report a false positive verification when there is at least one attestation with a valid signature and there are NO attestations of the type being verified (--type defaults to "custom"). This can happen when signing with a standard keypair and with "keyless" signing with Fulcio. This vulnerability can be reproduced with the `distroless.dev/static@sha256:dd7614b5a12bc4d617b223c588b4e0c833402b8f4991fb5702ea83afad1986e2` image. This image has a `vuln` attestation but not an `spdx` attestation. However, if you run `cosign verify-attestation --type=spdx` on this image, it incorrectly succeeds. This issue has been addressed in version 1.10.1 of cosign. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this issue.

What

cosign is a container signing and verification utility. In versions prior to 1.10.1 cosign can report a false positive if any attestation exists. `cosign verify-attestation` used with the `--type` flag will report a false positive verification when there is at least one attestation with a valid signature and there are NO attestations of the type being verified (--type defaults to "custom"). This can happen when signing with a standard keypair and with "keyless" signing with Fulcio. This vulnerability can be reproduced with the `distroless.dev/static@sha256:dd7614b5a12bc4d617b223c588b4e0c833402b8f4991fb5702ea83afad1986e2` image. This image has a `vuln` attestation but not an `spdx` attestation. However, if you run `cosign verify-attestation --type=spdx` on this image, it incorrectly succeeds. This issue has been addressed in version 1.10.1 of cosign. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this issue.

Why

The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

cosign is a container signing and verification utility. In versions prior to 1.10.1 cosign can report a false positive if any attestation exists. `cosign verify-attestation` used with the `--type` flag will report a false positive verification when there is at least one attestation with a valid signature and there are NO attestations of the type being verified (--type defaults to "custom"). This can happen when signing with a standard keypair and with "keyless" signing with Fulcio. This vulnerability can be reproduced with the `distroless.dev/static@sha256:dd7614b5a12bc4d617b223c588b4e0c833402b8f4991fb5702ea83afad1986e2` image. This image has a `vuln` attestation but not an `spdx` attestation. However, if you run `cosign verify-attestation --type=spdx` on this image, it incorrectly succeeds. This issue has been addressed in version 1.10.1 of cosign. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this issue.

Why

The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. 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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

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
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
Reference recorded

A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.

Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
Required interaction required
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
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-347 ↗

CWE-347: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature. The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data.

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:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Common 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.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
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.
NetworkCWE-347Public exploit reference
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2025-AVI-0622Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits VMware

ord?id=CVE-2022-32149 Référence CVE CVE-2022-32189 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-32189 Référence CVE CVE-2022-32205 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-32205 Référence CVE CVE-2022-32206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-32206 Référence CVE CVE-2022-32207 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-32207 Référence CVE CVE-2022-32208 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-32208 Référence CVE CVE-2022-32221 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-32221 Référence CVE CVE-2022-3358 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-3358 Référence CVE CVE-2022-35252 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-35252 Référence CVE CVE-2022-35929 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-35929 Référence CVE CVE-2022-3602 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-3602 Référence CVE CVE-2022-36056 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-36056 Référence CVE CVE-2022-36109 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-36109 Référence CVE CVE-2022-3786 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-3786 Référence CVE CVE-2022-3996 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-3996 Référence CVE CVE-2022-41715 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-41715 Référence CVE CVE-2022-41716 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-41716 Référence CVE CVE-2022-41717 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-20

Official advisory
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.
Patch available
Affected
< 1.10.1
Fixed
1.10.1
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
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 4 Aug 2022 · Last source change 22 Apr 2025, 17:43 UTC · CWE-347 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-6632
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates →

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-6632↗CISA Vulnrichment SSVC evidence↗Public exploit reference↗Public exploit reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2022-35929 · cve.blacktree.nl