CVE-2024-41710
Mitel 6970 Firmware ≤ 6.4.0.136
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-41710 is a high-severity Argument Injection (CWE-88) vulnerability in Mitel 6970 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 1% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities 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.
CVE-2024-41710 is an argument injection vulnerability caused by insufficient parameter sanitization during the boot process. It affects Mitel 6800 Series, 6900 Series, and 6900w Series SIP Phones, including the 6970 Conference Unit, through firmware version R6.4.0.HF1 (R6.4.0.136). The flaw is tracked under CWE-88 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 7.2.
An authenticated attacker with administrative privileges can exploit the issue over the network to inject arguments and execute arbitrary commands on the affected phone in the context of the system. Successful exploitation grants full control over the device configuration and operations.
Mitel has published security advisory 24-0019 along with a general support page listing affected products and remediation steps. The vendor recommends applying the latest firmware updates that address the sanitization weakness.
The vulnerability appears in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, confirming real-world exploitation activity. A public proof-of-concept is available on GitHub, and the EPSS score has remained near 0.20 with only minor fluctuation between its current value of 0.1969 and peak of 0.2157.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-39154
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability in the Mitel 6800 Series, 6900 Series, and 6900w Series SIP Phones, including the 6970 Conference Unit, through R6.4.0.HF1 (R6.4.0.136) could allow an authenticated attacker with administrative privilege to conduct an argument injection attack, due to insufficient parameter…
more
sanitization during the boot process. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary commands within the context of the system.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 12 February 2025
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing can discover argument-injection flaws in command-construction code but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops construction of command strings containing unneutralized delimiters or injected arguments.
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 proper input validation and command construction to prevent argument injection.
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.
Security testing can detect argument injection but does not prevent it at the source.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent argument injection.
Application security requirements include explicit rules for safe command-line argument handling and escaping.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe command invocation patterns and favor safer APIs.
Secure coding standards explicitly require proper neutralization of command arguments, directly eliminating CWE-88.
Change management can catch unsafe command patterns during reviews but is not a direct mitigation.