Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-35398

Memory Safety in Totolink Cp900L Firmware 4.1.5cu.798_b20221228

Published
28 May 2024
Modified
09 July 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0056 44th percentile
Risk Priority 72 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-35398 is a critical-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Totolink Cp900L Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 44th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

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.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

TOTOLINK CP900L v4.1.5cu.798_B20221228 was discovered to contain a stack overflow via the desc parameter in the function setMacFilterRules.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-35400Same product: Totolink Cp900L
CVE-2024-35399Same product: Totolink Cp900L
CVE-2024-35403Same product: Totolink Cp900L
CVE-2024-35401Same product: Totolink Cp900L
CVE-2024-35397Same product: Totolink Cp900L
CVE-2024-35396Same product: Totolink Cp900L
CVE-2024-7157Same vendor: Totolink
CVE-2024-33820Same vendor: Totolink
CVE-2025-45865Same vendor: Totolink
CVE-2025-45863Same vendor: Totolink

Affected Assets

totolink
cp900l firmware
4.1.5cu.798_b20221228

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V5.2.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.

Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.

Engineering principles require bounds checking and safe buffer handling in design.

Memory protection limits the impact of an overflow once it occurs.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.

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.

prevents

Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.

finds

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.

prevents

Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.

References