Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2023-20118 is a medium-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Cisco Rv016 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 1% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Small Business Routers RV016, RV042, RV042G, RV082, RV320, and RV325 allows an authenticated remote attacker to execute arbitrary commands on an affected device. The issue stems from improper validation of user input in incoming HTTP packets and is tracked as CWE-77. Successful exploitation grants root-level privileges and access to unauthorized data, though the attacker must possess valid administrative credentials. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 6.5.
An attacker with administrative access can send a crafted HTTP request to the management interface to trigger command execution. No unauthenticated vector exists, limiting the attack surface to accounts that already hold administrative rights on the device.
Cisco has stated it will not release software updates to address the flaw. The vendor advisory instead directs administrators to apply workarounds that disable the affected web-management feature. The vulnerability appears in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, confirming observed in-the-wild exploitation.
The associated EPSS score has remained low, with a current value of 0.0383 and a peak of 0.0406.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-24297
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Small Business Routers RV016, RV042, RV042G, RV082, RV320, and RV325 Routers could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to execute arbitrary commands on an affected device. This vulnerability is due to improper…
more
validation of user input within incoming HTTP packets. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted HTTP request to the web-based management interface. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to gain root-level privileges and access unauthorized data. To exploit this vulnerability, an attacker would need to have valid administrative credentials on the affected device. Cisco has not and will not release software updates that address this vulnerability. However, administrators may disable the affected feature as described in the Workarounds ["#workarounds"] section. {{value}} ["%7b%7bvalue%7d%7d"])}]]
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 03 March 2025
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8V1.2.9
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.