Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-49199 is a critical-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Acer Predator Connect W6X Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 10.0 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 30% 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.
Crafted MQTT messages can trigger command injection, resulting in root-level code execution on the target device. The vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2026-49199 with a CVSS score of 10.0 and is associated with CWE-77. The reference URL points to an Acer community knowledge base article, indicating the affected component is an Acer device exposing an MQTT interface.
An unauthenticated attacker with network access can send specially crafted MQTT messages to the device. Successful exploitation grants full root-level code execution, allowing complete control over the target without any user interaction or credentials.
The EPSS score rose from a low starting value of 0.0022 to a peak of 0.0100, indicating emerging exploitation interest after disclosure. The referenced Acer advisory provides the primary source of mitigation details for affected devices.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-33269
Vulnerability Data
Crafted MQTT messages can trigger command injection, resulting in root-level code execution on the target device.
- 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.
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.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and neutralization that prevent command injection.
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 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.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.