Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-45852 is a critical-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Viessmann Vitogate 300 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 4% 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.
CVE-2023-45852 is a command-injection vulnerability in Vitogate 300 version 2.1.3.0. Unauthenticated attackers can reach the /cgi-bin/vitogate.cgi endpoint and supply shell metacharacters inside the ipaddr field of a JSON put request, bypassing all authentication checks and executing arbitrary operating-system commands.
Remote, unauthenticated attackers can therefore obtain a root shell on the affected gateway, allowing them to read or modify configuration data, pivot into connected building-automation networks, or install persistent malware.
Public references consist of the vendor product page and a detailed proof-of-concept published on GitHub; neither source describes an official patch or configuration workaround.
The CVE carries a CVSS score of 9.8 and an EPSS score of 0.9359, indicating a high likelihood of exploitation in the wild.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-50122
Vulnerability Data
In Vitogate 300 2.1.3.0, /cgi-bin/vitogate.cgi allows an unauthenticated attacker to bypass authentication and execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in the ipaddr params JSON data for the put method.
- 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.