Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-33530 is a high-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Tenda G103 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 32% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV 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.
The vulnerability CVE-2023-33530 is a command injection flaw tracked under CWE-77 that affects the Tenda G103 Gigabit GPON Terminal running firmware version V1.0.0.5. It received a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.8, driven by network attack vector, low complexity, and high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
An attacker who first obtains web management privileges can inject operating-system commands through the management interface, resulting in the ability to spawn a shell and execute arbitrary code on the device.
Public references consist of the vendor site and a GitHub repository containing a proof-of-concept PDF that demonstrates the remote code execution path; no vendor advisory or patch information is supplied in these sources. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.0688 with no material rise after disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-37689
Vulnerability Data
There is a command injection vulnerability in the Tenda G103 Gigabit GPON Terminal with firmware version V1.0.0.5. If an attacker gains web management privileges, they can inject commands gaining shell privileges.
- 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.