CVE-2022-1972 in Linux
Summary
by MITRE • 09/14/2022
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2022-2078. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2022-2078. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2022-2078 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 03/17/2026
This CVE entry represents a rejected candidate number that was withdrawn due to duplication with another vulnerability identifier. The rejection notice indicates that CVE-2022-1972 was essentially a reservation duplicate of CVE-2022-2078, making it unnecessary to maintain two separate entries for what are essentially the same vulnerability. This type of duplicate occurrence is common in the CVE identification process where multiple organizations may independently identify and assign candidate numbers to the same security flaw before the official CVE number is assigned. The rejection of this candidate number demonstrates the importance of proper CVE coordination and the need for organizations to consult existing CVE databases before assigning new candidate numbers to prevent such duplication issues.
The technical context surrounding this rejection highlights the need for proper CVE management procedures within organizations and the broader cybersecurity community. When multiple entities identify the same vulnerability, they should coordinate to ensure they are not creating duplicate entries that could confuse security professionals and complicate vulnerability management processes. The fact that this candidate was rejected and redirected to CVE-2022-2078 indicates that the actual vulnerability had already been properly catalogued and assigned a unique identifier by the appropriate CVE Numbering Authority. This situation underscores the importance of maintaining awareness of existing CVE entries and following established procedures for vulnerability reporting and coordination.
From a security operations perspective, organizations should not use the rejected CVE-2022-1972 identifier for any vulnerability management activities. The rejection notice explicitly directs users to reference CVE-2022-2078 instead, which means security teams should focus their remediation efforts and monitoring on the properly assigned vulnerability. This type of duplicate candidate number situation can create confusion in security information and event management systems, patch management workflows, and vulnerability databases. Security professionals must ensure they are using the correct CVE identifier to avoid potential gaps in their security coverage or false positives in their vulnerability assessments.
The proper handling of CVE candidate numbers and the rejection of duplicates reflects the established processes within the CVE numbering authorities to maintain a clean and accurate vulnerability database. This process helps prevent the proliferation of redundant entries that could otherwise clutter the CVE system and make it more difficult for security practitioners to identify and address genuine security threats. Organizations should implement internal procedures to verify CVE identifiers against established databases before incorporating them into their security operations, and they should monitor for CVE rejection notices to ensure they are not inadvertently using deprecated identifiers. The rejection of CVE-2022-1972 serves as a reminder of the importance of coordination and database maintenance in the cybersecurity community's vulnerability management efforts.
The situation also demonstrates the importance of following industry standards such as those established by the MITRE Corporation for CVE management and the ATT&CK framework's approach to vulnerability categorization and tracking. When organizations encounter rejected CVE candidates, they should follow the guidance provided in the rejection notices and update their systems accordingly. The proper handling of such cases ensures that security tools, databases, and monitoring systems maintain accurate information about actual vulnerabilities rather than outdated or duplicate identifiers that could compromise security effectiveness. This rejection process is part of the broader cybersecurity ecosystem's quality control measures that help maintain the integrity and usefulness of vulnerability identification systems for all stakeholders.