Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2021-3577 is a high-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Binatoneglobal Focus 68 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, ranked in the top 1.0% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2021-26886
Vulnerability Data
An unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability was reported in some Motorola-branded Binatone Hubble Cameras that could allow an attacker on the same network unauthorized access to the device.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI
Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 5 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Periodic review and update of procedures reduces incorrect authorization implementations over time.
Supervision identifies cases where authorization logic incorrectly permits unauthorized actions.
Defining permitted attribute values and auditing modifications reduces the chance of incorrect authorization outcomes due to tampered or missing labels.
The authorization process and usage restrictions help prevent incorrect authorization for remote access types.
Establishing configuration and connection requirements helps ensure correct rather than incorrect authorization for wireless access.
Establishing connection authorization processes for mobile devices helps ensure authorization decisions are correctly implemented rather than incorrect.
Monitoring account use, notifying on changes, and reviewing accounts for compliance corrects incorrect authorization assignments.
Ensures authorization decisions for external system use are correctly implemented and enforced.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Defining, enforcing, and reviewing access authorizations and least privilege directly prevents incorrect authorization checks.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.
Requiring consistency between access rights and classification plus formal approval steps ensures that the authorization logic correctly distinguishes between entities that should and should not be granted access.
Enforcing policy-driven approval and role-change reviews stops incorrect or stale authorization decisions from remaining in effect after job changes or terminations.
By tying access rights to identity, device, location and classification, the control reduces the likelihood that an authorization decision will be based on an incorrect or bypassed policy.