CVE-2024-39801
Memory Safety in Wavlink Wl-Wn533A8 Firmware m33a8.v5030.210505
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-39801 is a critical-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Wavlink Wl-Wn533A8 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 31% 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.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
Multiple buffer overflow vulnerabilities, including CWE-120, affect the qos.cgi qos_settings() functionality in the Wavlink AC3000 router running firmware version M33A8.V5030.210505. These issues arise from improper handling of the `qos_bandwidth` POST parameter, where a specially crafted HTTP request can trigger a stack-based buffer overflow.
An authenticated attacker with high privileges (PR:H) can exploit these vulnerabilities over the network (AV:N) with low complexity (AC:L). Successful exploitation leads to high-impact consequences across confidentiality, integrity, availability, and scope change (CVSS:3.1 score of 9.1), potentially enabling arbitrary code execution or system compromise via the stack-based overflow.
Talos Intelligence documented these flaws in vulnerability reports TALOS-2024-2049, available at https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2024-2049 and https://www.talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2024-2049. Practitioners should consult these advisories for detailed technical analysis and recommended mitigations, such as firmware updates if available or restricting access to the affected qos.cgi endpoint.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-38345
Vulnerability Data
Multiple buffer overflow vulnerabilities exist in the qos.cgi qos_settings() functionality of Wavlink AC3000 M33A8.V5030.210505. A specially crafted HTTP request can lead to stack-based buffer overflow. An attacker can make an authenticated HTTP request to trigger these vulnerabilities.A buffer overflow vulnerability…
more
exists in the `qos_bandwidth` POST parameter.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
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.
Secure development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.
Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.
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.
Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.
Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.
Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.