CVE-2026-24345
CSRF in Nimbletech Ezcast Pro Dongle Ii Firmware 1.17478.146
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/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:Y/R:X/V:X/RE:L/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-24345 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Nimbletech Ezcast Pro Dongle Ii Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 6.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 4th 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-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-2026-24345 is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability affecting the Admin UI of EZCast Pro II version 1.17478.146. Published on 2026-01-27, this issue (mapped to CWE-20: Improper Input Validation and CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery) allows attackers to bypass authorization checks, granting full access to the admin UI. It carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), reflecting high severity due to its potential for significant impact.
Attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely over the network with low complexity and no required privileges, though it demands user interaction, such as an authenticated administrator visiting a malicious webpage or clicking a forged request. Successful exploitation enables full unauthorized access to the admin UI, resulting in high confidentiality, integrity, and availability impacts.
Mitigation guidance is available in the advisory from NTC Swiss at https://hub.ntc.swiss/ntcf-2025-32832, which security practitioners should consult for patching and workaround recommendations.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-4822
Vulnerability Data
Cross-Site Request Forgery in Admin UI of EZCast Pro II version 1.17478.146 allows attackers to bypass authorization checks and gain full access to the admin UI
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V3.3.2V3.5.1V10.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.
SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.
Access enforcement requires verifying that state-changing requests originate from the authenticated user rather than a forged cross-site source.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
Protecting session authenticity prevents attackers from replaying or forging authenticated requests via the victim's browser.
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 require and enforce input validation during development.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
By denying access to phishing or malicious sites, the control lowers the likelihood that a user will be tricked into submitting a forged request that performs an unintended action on another site.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
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).
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20