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-2026-6194 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Totolink A3002MU B20211125 (inferred from references). 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 39th 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-2026-6194 is a stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability affecting the Totolink A3002MU router on firmware version B20211125.1046. The flaw exists in the sub_410188 function of the /boafrm/formWlanSetup component within the HTTP Request Handler, where manipulation of the "wan-url" argument triggers the overflow.
Remote attackers with low privileges can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required, as indicated by its CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). Exploitation enables high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution. A public exploit is available, increasing the risk of attacks.
Advisories referenced in VulDB entries (vuln/357116 and related pages) document the issue and recent submission details, while a GitHub repository provides exploit specifics for the A3002MU formWlanSetup component. The Totolink vendor site (totolink.net) should be checked for any firmware updates or mitigation recommendations.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-22034
Vulnerability Data
A weakness has been identified in Totolink A3002MU B20211125.1046. Affected by this vulnerability is the function sub_410188 of the file /boafrm/formWlanSetup of the component HTTP Request Handler. This manipulation of the argument wan-url causes stack-based buffer overflow. Remote exploitation of…
more
the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 2 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
V17.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can discover stack-buffer overflows before deployment.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from exceeding stack buffer bounds.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability to execute injected code after a stack overflow.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
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.
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.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.
Change-management gates can enforce security reviews that catch buffer issues.
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).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248594 OL 8 must implement address space layout randomization (ASLR) to protect its memory from unauthorized code execution. prevents CWE-121
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-121