CVE-2026-5184
Command Injection in Trendnet Tew-713Re Firmware 1.02
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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-2026-5184 is a low-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Trendnet Tew-713Re Firmware. Its CVSS base score is 2.1 (Low).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); 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 command injection vulnerability exists in the TRENDnet TEW-713RE wireless range extender up to firmware version 1.02. The flaw resides in an unspecified function within the /goform/setSysAdm endpoint, where unsanitized input supplied to the admuser argument is passed to a system command. The issue is tracked under CWE-74 and CWE-77 and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 2.1.
An authenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted admuser value to execute arbitrary operating-system commands on the device. Because the attack requires only low privileges and no user interaction, an adversary who has obtained valid credentials or who can reach the web interface can achieve limited control over confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the affected extender. A publicly available proof-of-concept exploit has been posted on GitHub.
No vendor advisory, patch, or mitigation guidance has been issued; TRENDnet was notified prior to disclosure but did not respond. The public references consist solely of the exploit description and Vuldb entries.
EPSS for the CVE rose from a low baseline to a peak of 0.0141 on 2026-04-06 before receding, indicating measurable exploitation interest shortly after publication.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-17335
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was identified in TRENDnet TEW-713RE up to 1.02. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /goform/setSysAdm. The manipulation of the argument admuser leads to command injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is…
more
publicly available and might be used. 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
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover command-construction flaws before deployment.
SI-10 directly requires validation of information inputs to reject malformed or special-element content before it reaches downstream parsers.
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 output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
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.
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 injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.