CVE-2022-22948 is an incorrect default file permissions vulnerability vulnerability in VMware vCenter Server. CISA added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalogue on 17 July 2024, which means attackers have used it in real attacks. VMware vCenter Server contains an incorrect default file permissions vulnerability that allows a remote, privileged attacker to gain access to sensitive information.
What incorrect default file permissions mean in a vCenter Server context
An incorrect default-permissions flaw means the product ships with file or directory access settings that are too broad, too permissive, or otherwise unsuitable for sensitive material. In a management platform like VMware vCenter Server, that matters because the file system often contains configuration data, service material, and operational records that can expose infrastructure at scale if read by the wrong party.
The danger is not limited to one sensitive file. Once default permissions are wrong, the mistake can propagate across deployments, backups, logs, and derived artefacts. That turns a local configuration issue into a broader exposure problem, especially in environments where administrators assume vendor defaults are safe until actively changed. Guidance from the CISA Secure by Design initiative is relevant here because default-secure configuration is the baseline expectation, not an optional hardening step.
Why this vulnerability is dangerous
This class of flaw is dangerous because file permissions define who can observe or manipulate sensitive operating data. If a privileged remote attacker can reach the affected surface, weak defaults can turn access into disclosure, and disclosure into follow-on compromise. In infrastructure management software, even read-only access to the wrong files can help an attacker map the environment, recover secrets, or identify the next step in a broader intrusion chain.
For that reason, the vulnerability should be understood as an access-control failure with real operational consequences, not just a housekeeping issue. The attacker does not need to defeat strong cryptography if the system exposes material through permissive filesystem rules. The exact product and exploit history are tracked in the NIST National Vulnerability Database and the CVE Program, which are the right places to confirm record details and remediation references.
How organisations check exposure and scope
Exposure review starts with asset inventory, because teams need to know exactly where the affected vCenter Server instance exists and whether it is internet-facing, reachable from admin networks, or nested behind a management plane with broad trust. Version tracking alone is not enough; organisations should also review whether the instance hosts high-value integrations, privileged admin workflows, or sensitive configuration stores that make file disclosure especially consequential.
Vendor advisories and authoritative vulnerability feeds should be used to confirm applicability, version scope, and available fixes instead of relying on informal guidance. Where a platform controls other infrastructure, exposure assessment should also include the downstream systems that trust its output, because an apparently narrow file-permissions issue can still reveal credentials, certificates, or topology data that widen the blast radius.
Remediation, detection, and post-incident review
Where a patch or configuration correction cannot be applied immediately, compensating controls should narrow access to the management plane, restrict who can reach the host, and reduce the value of any readable files by limiting adjacent privilege. This is also a strong reason to review whether the affected system stores reusable secrets, service credentials, or session material that should be rotated if exploitation is suspected.
The CIS Controls v8 remain useful as a practical baseline for inventory, access control, logging, and vulnerability management. After remediation, organisations should validate that the permissions change is effective, check for suspicious file access or unexpected administrative activity, and review whether sensitive material was already copied before the fix. If compromise is confirmed or strongly suspected, follow-up should include credential and secret review, because permission flaws often become a stepping stone rather than an end state.
Risk and Threat Considerations
Because vCenter Server is a high-value management layer, an attacker who can read sensitive files may gain durable leverage over the broader environment. The immediate risk is disclosure, but the practical threat is often what that disclosure enables next, such as credential theft, privilege escalation, or discovery of systems that can be targeted later.
Failure mechanism: incorrect default permissions allow a remote privileged attacker to access files that were intended to remain restricted, undermining the trust boundary around management-plane data.
Impact: Sensitive information can be exposed and reused for deeper compromise, which can affect infrastructure control, recovery confidence, and the security of linked administrative systems.
Standards & Framework Alignment
This section maps relevant standards and security frameworks to the operational risks and controls described in this guidance.
CIS Controls v8, NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 and NIST CSF 2.0 set the technical controls, while ISO/IEC 27001:2022 defines the regulatory obligations.
| Framework | Control / Reference | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| CIS Controls v8 | CIS-5 — Account Management | Default file permissions affect who can read or use sensitive operational data. |
| CIS-7 — Continuous Vulnerability Management | This CVE requires identification, prioritisation, and remediation as part of vulnerability handling. | |
| CIS-8 — Audit Log Management | Detection depends on reviewing access to sensitive files and unusual administrative activity. | |
| Recommendation — Review and restrict access paths, then verify privileged accounts cannot read exposed sensitive files. Prioritise the affected vCenter instance for remediation and confirm the fix through validation scans. Centralise and review logs for anomalous file access and post-exploitation administrative behaviour. | ||
| NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 | AC-6 — Least Privilege | Incorrect default permissions are a direct least-privilege failure on sensitive files. |
| CM-6 — Configuration Settings | The vulnerability is caused by unsafe default configuration of file permissions. | |
| AU-2 — Event Logging | File-access monitoring is needed to detect exploitation and validate remediation. | |
| Recommendation — Apply least privilege to file and service access so only approved administrators can read sensitive data. Harden default file permissions and verify them after deployment, upgrade, and recovery. Log access to sensitive configuration paths and review events for suspicious reads or changes. | ||
| ISO/IEC 27001:2022 | A.8.9 — Configuration management | Secure configuration management covers correcting unsafe default file permissions. |
| A.8.15 — Logging | Logging helps detect suspicious access to files exposed by weak permissions. | |
| A.8.16 — Monitoring activities | Monitoring is needed to spot post-exploitation access patterns around the management plane. | |
| Recommendation — Standardise and verify secure file-permission baselines across deployed vCenter instances. Collect and review logs that show access to sensitive files and administrative paths. Monitor for abnormal reads, privilege use, and other signs of post-compromise activity. | ||
| NIST CSF 2.0 | PR.AA-05 — Access Permissions Management | Access permissions are the core issue in an incorrect-permissions vulnerability. |
| Recommendation — Tighten and verify access permissions for sensitive management-plane files. | ||
Practitioner Guidance
Why practitioners should care: Treat this as a configuration-quality issue with security consequences, not a cosmetic hardening item. In management software, weak defaults can persist unnoticed across upgrades, cloned appliances, and inherited operating procedures.
What to watch for: Look for file reads that do not match expected admin behaviour, unexplained access to configuration paths, and evidence that credentials or certificates stored near the vulnerable files may need rotation after suspected exploitation.
Practitioner takeaway: Correct the permissions problem, then verify the surrounding trust assumptions, because the real damage usually comes from what the attacker can learn next.
Related resources from NHI Mgmt Group
- CVE-2024-51567 (CyberPanel Incorrect Default Permissions)
- Why do incorrect file ownership and excessive permissions create security risk in Linux environments?
- What is the difference between filesystem permissions and centralized SFTP command control for server file access?
- Why do Jenkins file-read flaws become especially risky when the server has broad permissions?