CVE-2023-29802
RCE in Totolink X18 Firmware 9.1.0cu.2021_b20220326 … 9.1.0cu.2024_b20220329
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-29802 is a critical-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Totolink X18 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 21% 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 X18 firmware version V9.1.0cu.2024_B20220329 contains a command-injection flaw (CWE-77) in the setDiagnosisCfg function, where the ip parameter is passed to a system command without proper sanitization. The vulnerability carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.8, reflecting network attack vector, low complexity, and no required authentication or user interaction.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted ip value to the affected endpoint and execute arbitrary operating-system commands on the device. Successful exploitation grants full control over the router, enabling actions such as configuration changes, traffic interception, or persistence mechanisms.
Public references consist of technical write-ups hosted on Notion that demonstrate the injection vector; no vendor advisory or firmware patch information is included in the available sources. The associated EPSS score reached a peak of 0.2264 after disclosure before settling at the current value of 0.1490, indicating measurable post-publication exploitation interest.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-33340
Vulnerability Data
TOTOLINK X18 V9.1.0cu.2024_B20220329 was discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the ip parameter in the setDiagnosisCfg function.
- CWE(s)
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.