Security Resilience

CVE-2024-22546

Command Injection in Trendnet Tew-815Dap Firmware 1.0.2.0

Published
30 April 2024
Modified
01 April 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.4
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.015 74th percentile
Risk Priority 50 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2024-22546 is a medium-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Trendnet Tew-815Dap Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 6.4 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked in the top 26% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

TRENDnet TEW-815DAP 1.0.2.0 is vulnerable to Command Injection via the do_setNTP function. An authenticated attacker with administrator privileges can leverage this vulnerability over the network via a malicious POST request.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-0919Same product: Trendnet Tew-815Dap
CVE-2023-0611Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2024-22545Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2023-51833Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2024-28354Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2024-28353Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2023-49237Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2023-51835Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2023-0640Same vendor: Trendnet
CVE-2023-0638Same vendor: Trendnet

Affected Assets

trendnet
tew-815dap firmware
1.0.2.0

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.

Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.

Secure engineering principles include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.

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.

blocks

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.

blocks

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.

blocks

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.

prevents

Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.

finds

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.

References