CVE-2023-24144
RCE in Totolink Ca300-Poe Firmware 6.2c.884
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2023-24144 is a critical-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Totolink Ca300-Poe Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, ranked in the top 20% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
TOTOLINK CA300-PoE firmware version V6.2c.884 contains a command injection vulnerability in the setRebootScheCfg function, where the hour parameter is processed without adequate sanitization. The flaw is tracked as CWE-77 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.8, reflecting network-accessible exploitation that requires no authentication or user interaction.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted hour value to the affected function and execute arbitrary operating-system commands on the device. Successful exploitation grants the attacker full control over the router, enabling confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts.
The EPSS score for this CVE rose from a low baseline after the 2023 disclosure to a peak of 0.3113 on 2025-01-22 before receding to the current value of 0.1490, indicating that exploitation interest increased well after public release and that the issue merits renewed attention.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-28207
Vulnerability Data
TOTOLINK CA300-PoE V6.2c.884 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the hour parameter in the setRebootScheCfg function.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
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.
A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices including secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing (scans/penetration), and developer training that reduce command injection defects, but leaves a minority slice (e.g. incomplete implementation of those practices, outsourced development without full assurance, or post-SDLC changes) where the weakness can still arise and be exploitable.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (e.g. distrust external input, secure session control, data validation/sanitization, least privilege) and design reviews that can stop command injection from being introduced, but this is only a minority slice of CWE-77 because the weakness can still arise in code that bypasses those principles, in non-reviewed components, or in runtime injection vectors the architecture review does not reach.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-77, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.