CVE-2026-4976
Memory Safety in Totolink Lr350 Firmware 9.3.5u.6369_b20220309
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: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-2026-4976 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Totolink Lr350 Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 7.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 48th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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.
CVE-2026-4976 is a buffer overflow vulnerability (CWE-119, CWE-120) in the Totolink LR350 router firmware version 9.3.5u.6369_B20220309. The issue affects the setWiFiGuestCfg function in the /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi file, where manipulation of the ssid argument triggers the overflow. Published on 2026-03-27, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
An attacker with low privileges can exploit this remotely over the network with low complexity and no user interaction. Successful exploitation grants high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, potentially allowing full compromise of the affected device. A public exploit exists and could be used.
References include VulDB entries (ctiid.353863, id.353863, submit.778274) documenting the vulnerability, a Notion site with exploit details, and the Totolink vendor website (totolink.net). No specific patches or mitigation steps are detailed in the disclosure.
The exploit has been made public, increasing the risk of active exploitation against unpatched Totolink LR350 devices.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16852
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was found in Totolink LR350 9.3.5u.6369_B20220309. This vulnerability affects the function setWiFiGuestCfg of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi. The manipulation of the argument ssid results in buffer overflow. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public…
more
and could be used.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2V5.2.1
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.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
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 catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.