Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:P/AU:Y/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2024-43649 is a critical-severity OS Command Injection (CWE-78) vulnerability in Divd (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 24% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-6 (Least Privilege) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — 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-2024-43649 is an authenticated command injection vulnerability (CWE-78, CWE-250) in the filename of a <redacted>.exe request within the Iocharger firmware for AC models prior to version 24120701. This flaw enables remote code execution as the root user. Published on 2025-01-09, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), reflecting network accessibility with low complexity and low-privilege requirements.
An attacker with any level of authenticated access to the web interface can exploit the vulnerability over any network connection serving it, without needing user interaction or additional mitigations. Exploitation requires discovering the uncommon injection point, likely via firmware reverse-engineering or exhaustive testing of <redacted> fields, and obtaining low-privilege credentials either directly or by social engineering. Successful attacks yield critical impact, providing full root control over the charging station for arbitrary file and service manipulation, with potential for network pivoting and physical safety risks due to the device's power capabilities.
Advisories from DIVD CSIRT, including https://csirt.divd.nl/CVE-2024-43649/ and https://csirt.divd.nl/DIVD-2024-00035/, along with the vendor site at https://iocharger.com, detail mitigation steps for this issue.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-40393
Vulnerability Data
Authenticated command injection in the filename of a <redacted>.exe request leads to remote code execution as the root user. This issue affects Iocharger firmware for AC models before version 24120701. Likelihood: Moderate – This action is not a common place…
more
for command injection vulnerabilities to occur. Thus, an attacker will likely only be able to find this vulnerability by reverse-engineering the firmware or trying it on all <redacted> fields. The attacker will also need a (low privilege) account to gain access to the <redacted> binary, or convince a user with such access to execute a payload. Impact: Critical – The attacker has full control over the charging station as the root user, and can arbitrarily add, modify and delete files and services. CVSS clarification: This attack can be performed over any network conenction serving the web interfacr (AV:N), and there are not additional mitigating measures that need to be circumvented (AC:L) or other prerequisites (AT:N). The attack does require privileges, but the level does not matter (PR:L), there is no user interaction required (UI:N). The attack leeds to a full compromised of the charger (VC:H/VI:H/VA:H) and a compromised charger can be used to "pivot" to networks that should normally not be reachable (SC:L/SI:L/SA:H). Because this is an EV chargers with significant pwoer, there is a potential safety imp0act (S:P). THis attack can be automated (AU:Y).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 6 OS baselines
V10.2.3V13.2.2V1.2.5V1.2.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Least privilege directly requires that only the minimum necessary authorizations are granted, structurally eliminating execution with unnecessary privileges.
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect command sanitization during development.
Input validation directly neutralizes or rejects special characters that would otherwise alter OS command structure.
Least functionality restricts available OS commands and interpreters, limiting the blast radius of injection.
Secure engineering principles require proper neutralization of untrusted input before command construction.
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.AA-05 directly enforces least privilege so largely eliminates CWE-250 at design time, yet the weakness can still arise from runtime escalation paths, third-party code, or misapplied role definitions outside this single control.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
Routine patching/maintenance can remediate known command-injection CVEs in dependencies (partial forward) but does nothing to stop developers from introducing improper neutralization in custom code (none reverse).
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.
Requiring explicit justification and time-limited grants discourages the routine allocation of unnecessary privileges that would otherwise allow execution with more rights than required.
Restricting privileged utilities to the fewest trusted users and requiring explicit authorization directly stops developers or operators from embedding or invoking code that runs with unnecessary elevated rights.
Mandating separate non-privileged identities for routine work and restricting privileged accounts to administrative tasks reduces the chance that everyday operations run with unnecessary elevated rights.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.
The control explicitly calls for minimizing privileged identities and disabling unnecessary accounts, thereby reducing the number of processes that run with unnecessary privileges.
The requirement to restrict privileged access and apply segregation of duties limits the number of processes or accounts that must run with elevated rights, lowering the impact of unnecessary privilege assignments.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220712 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-250
Windows 11 (1 rule)
- V-253269 Only accounts responsible for the administration of a system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-250
Windows Server 2016 (1 rule)
- V-225007 Only administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system must have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-250
Windows Server 2019 (1 rule)
- V-205746 Windows Server 2019 must only allow Administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system to have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-250
Windows Server 2022 (1 rule)
- V-254428 Windows Server 2022 must only allow administrators responsible for the member server or standalone or nondomain-joined system to have Administrator rights on the system. prevents CWE-250