CVE-2026-4497
Command Injection in Totolink Wa300 Firmware 5.2cu.7112_b20190227
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-2026-4497 is a medium-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Totolink Wa300 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 22% 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 vulnerability was identified in the Totolink WA300 device running firmware version 5.2cu.7112_B20190227. The issue resides in the recvUpgradeNewFw function within /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi and stems from improper handling of input that permits operating system command injection, corresponding to CWE-77 and CWE-78. The flaw is remotely reachable and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 6.9 reflecting network attack vector, low complexity, and no required privileges or user interaction.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply crafted input to the affected CGI endpoint and execute arbitrary operating system commands on the device. Successful exploitation yields limited effects on confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the target system. A proof-of-concept exploit has been made publicly available.
The EPSS score for this CVE rose from a low baseline to a peak of 0.0396 on 2026-03-26 shortly after disclosure before receding to its current value of 0.0069, indicating a temporary increase in observed exploitation interest. No vendor advisory or patch information is referenced in the available sources.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-13770
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was determined in Totolink WA300 5.2cu.7112_B20190227. Affected by this issue is the function recvUpgradeNewFw of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi. This manipulation causes os command injection. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and…
more
may be utilized.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8V1.2.9
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
Input validation directly stops construction of commands from untrusted data containing special elements.
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 include proper neutralization and safe command construction practices.
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 input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.
Runtime monitoring of software and data can detect anomalous command execution resulting from injection.
Identifying recorded vulnerabilities enables remediation of command-injection flaws before exploitation.
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.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent command injection.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection flaws including command injection.
Secure architecture principles reduce the attack surface but do not prescribe the specific neutralization techniques needed.
Environment separation limits the blast radius of an exploited command injection but does not prevent the flaw itself.