Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-6814 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Netgear Prosafe Network Management System. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 20% 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-2024-6814 is a SQL injection vulnerability in the getFilterString method of NETGEAR ProSAFE Network Management System. The flaw stems from insufficient validation of user-supplied input used to build SQL queries, enabling remote code execution as the SYSTEM account on affected installations. It carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.8 and is tracked under CWE-89; the issue was originally reported as ZDI-CAN-23399.
Authenticated remote attackers can exploit the vulnerability by supplying crafted input to the affected method, resulting in arbitrary code execution on the target system. No unauthenticated attack path is described.
NETGEAR has published security advisory PSV-2024-0019 addressing SQL injection in NMS300, and the Zero Day Initiative has released details under ZDI-24-901. The EPSS score remains flat at 0.1008 with no material increase observed after disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-47838
Vulnerability Data
NETGEAR ProSAFE Network Management System getFilterString SQL Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of NETGEAR ProSAFE Network Management System. Authentication is required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw…
more
exists within the getFilterString method. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of a user-supplied string before using it to construct SQL queries. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of SYSTEM. Was ZDI-CAN-23399.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover SQLi flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from reaching SQL query construction without neutralization.
Secure engineering principles require parameterized queries and input sanitization that structurally eliminate SQLi.
System monitoring can identify attempted SQLi exploitation via anomalous queries after the weakness exists.
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 target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.