CVE-2024-7157
Memory Safety in Totolink A3100R Firmware 4.1.2cu.5050_b20200504
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2024-7157 is a high-severity Classic Buffer Overflow (CWE-120) vulnerability in Totolink A3100R Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 8.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 6% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV 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.
A buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the TOTOLINK A3100R router running firmware 4.1.2cu.5050_B20200504. It resides in the getSaveConfig function of /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi when processing the http_host argument during configuration save requests and is tracked as CWE-120.
An authenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted http_host value to trigger the overflow, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution or device compromise. The attack requires no user interaction and can be launched over the network.
No vendor patch or mitigation guidance has been released; the vendor was notified prior to public disclosure but did not respond. Public proof-of-concept code is available in open repositories.
The associated CVSS 4.0 score is 8.7 and the EPSS remains flat at 0.0757 with no material increase after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-48125
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was found in TOTOLINK A3100R 4.1.2cu.5050_B20200504. It has been classified as critical. This affects the function getSaveConfig of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi?action=save&setting. The manipulation of the argument http_host leads to buffer overflow. It is possible to initiate the attack…
more
remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-272571. NOTE: The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can find missing size checks before deployment.
Input validation directly enforces size checks before buffer copies.
Engineering principles require bounds checking and safe buffer handling in design.
Memory protection limits the impact of an overflow once it occurs.
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 development practices directly enforce bounds checking and input validation that prevent classic buffer overflows.
Vulnerability identification processes such as code review or scanning detect classic buffer overflows before exploitation.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing unchecked buffer copies with corrected versions.
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.
Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect buffer overflows through fuzzing and static analysis, though it does not prevent them at the source.
Secure development life cycle mandates processes that can include input validation and bounds checking to prevent buffer overflows.
Application security requirements can specify input-size validation and safe buffer handling to mitigate classic buffer overflows.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding patterns that reduce the likelihood of unchecked buffer copies.