CVE-2024-5244
Tp-Link Omada Er605 Firmware 2.2.2
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:NSummary
CVE-2024-5244 is a medium-severity Reliance on Security Through Obscurity (CWE-656) vulnerability in Tp-Link Omada Er605 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 4.2 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique System Information Discovery (T1082); ranked at the 27th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) and SC-13 (Cryptographic Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-46483
Vulnerability Data
TP-Link Omada ER605 Reliance on Security Through Obscurity Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to access or spoof DDNS messages on affected installations of TP-Link Omada ER605 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. However, devices are vulnerable…
more
only if configured to use the Comexe DDNS service. The specific flaw exists within the cmxddnsd executable. The issue results from reliance on obscurity to secure network data. An attacker can leverage this in conjunction with other vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-22439.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.3.4
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires selection and implementation of approved cryptographic methods whose strength does not rest on secrecy of design.
Security and privacy engineering principles explicitly prohibit reliance on obscurity and require documented, verifiable protection mechanisms.
Requires cryptographic or equivalent protection of information at rest, eliminating dependence on obscurity for confidentiality.
Mandates actual cryptographic or equivalent protection of transmitted data rather than depending on hidden algorithms or keys.
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 explicitly reject obscurity-based designs in favor of proven controls.
Risk-management policy can mandate avoidance of obscurity but does not itself implement technical alternatives.
Risk analysis surfaces obscurity as a weakness yet does not prevent its introduction.
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.
Mandates use of cryptography whose strength is independent of secrecy of design or keys.
Requires secure architecture and engineering principles that reject reliance on obscurity.
Requires authentication mechanisms whose strength does not depend on secrecy of implementation.
Secure-coding rules prohibit hidden or undocumented security mechanisms.
Security testing can expose mechanisms whose only protection is obscurity.