Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-7154 is a high-severity Command Injection (CWE-77) vulnerability in Totolink A8000RU (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 8.9 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 12% 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.
A weakness has been identified in the Totolink A8000RU router running firmware version 7.1cu.643_b20200521. The issue resides in the setAdvancedInfoShow function within the /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi file of the CGI Handler component and stems from improper handling of the tty_server argument, enabling OS command injection. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable without authentication and carries a CVSS 4.0 score of 8.9, with associated CWEs 77 and 78.
An attacker can send a crafted HTTP request to the affected CGI endpoint to inject and execute arbitrary operating system commands on the device. Because the attack requires no user interaction or credentials and the exploit code has been published publicly, unauthenticated remote adversaries can leverage it to compromise the router's confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
The EPSS score has remained low and essentially flat, moving only from 0.0122 to a peak of 0.0125, indicating limited observed exploitation interest to date. Public references include a detailed proof-of-concept on GitHub along with entries on VulDB, but no vendor advisory or patch information is provided in the available sources.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25918
Vulnerability Data
A weakness has been identified in Totolink A8000RU 7.1cu.643_b20200521. This affects the function setAdvancedInfoShow of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi of the component CGI Handler. Executing a manipulation of the argument tty_server can lead to os command injection. The attack can be…
more
launched remotely. 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
—
—
—
V1.2.5V1.2.8
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.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
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.
Security testing in development catches command-injection vulnerabilities before release.
Secure coding standards require proper escaping and parameterization of commands, directly eliminating CWE-77.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-77, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.