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-2024-43656 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 28% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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.
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-2024-43656 is an improper neutralization of special elements used in a command, classified as a command injection vulnerability (CWE-78, CWE-434), that enables OS command injection with root privileges. It affects the Iocharger firmware for AC model chargers running versions prior to 24120701. The vulnerability is accessible over any network interface serving the web UI, with 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, low attack complexity, low privileges required, no user interaction, and high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
An attacker with low-privileged access (PR:L), such as any authenticated account, can exploit this vulnerability over the network by modifying a settings backup file to inject a new CGI script into the correct directory within the redacted file structure. This requires identifying the backup file structure, which is described as moderately difficult, and either possessing an account capable of restoring backups or convincing a legitimate user to upload the tampered file. Successful exploitation grants full root-level control over the charging station, allowing arbitrary addition, modification, or deletion of files and services, with potential to pivot into otherwise inaccessible networks (SC:L/SI:L/SA:H) and safety impacts due to the EV charger's power handling capabilities (S:P).
Advisories from DIVD CSIRT (DIVD-2024-00035) and the vendor at iocharger.com detail the issue, with mitigation centered on updating to firmware version 24120701 or later to address the command injection flaw. Practitioners should review these resources for full patch instructions and verify network exposure of affected web UIs.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-40400
Vulnerability Data
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') vulnerability allows OS Command Injection as root This issue affects Iocharger firmware for AC model chargers before version 24120701. Likelihood: Moderate – It might be difficult for an attacker…
more
to identify the file structure of the <redated> directory, and then modify the backup to add a new CGI script in the correct directory. Furthermore, the attacker will need an account to restore the settings backup, or convince a user with such access to upload a modified backup file. Impact: Critical – The attacker has full control over the charging station as the root user, and can arbitrarily add, modify and deletefiles and services. CVSS clarification: Any network interface serving the web ui is vulnerable (AV:N) and there are not additional security measures to circumvent (AC:L), nor does the attack require and existing preconditions (AT:N). The attack is authenticated, but the level of authentication does not matter (PR:L), nor is any user interaction required (UI:N). The attack leads to a full compromised (VC:H/VI:H/VA:H), and compromised devices can be used to pivot into networks that should potentially not be accessible (SC:L/SI:L/SA:H). Becuase this is an EV charger handing significant power, there is a potential safety impact (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
—
—
—
V5.1.1V1.2.5V1.2.8V15.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
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.
Malicious-code protection at entry points blocks dangerous file types from being accepted and executed.
Least privilege reduces the permissions available to any process that could be subverted by injected commands.
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.
Restricting execution of unauthorized software directly blocks dangerous uploaded files from running.
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.
Hardened configuration baselines can enforce allowed file types and processing rules.
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.
Security testing and code review target insecure use of operating-system command interfaces, catching command-injection flaws introduced during development.
Secure-coding guidelines and security testing explicitly address restrictions on allowed file types and upload handling, reducing the risk that dangerous file uploads are accepted without validation.
Mandated testing for malicious content and known vulnerabilities reduces the likelihood that an outsourced component will contain or accept dangerous file types that could later be uploaded or executed.
Application allow-listing and pre-use scanning of received files directly blocks the introduction of executable content that has not been vetted, eliminating the primary vector for unrestricted dangerous file uploads.