Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2024-51228· NVD / CVE Program· CNA mitre

An issue in TOTOLINK-CX-A3002RU V1.0.4-B20171106.1512 and TOTOLINK-CX-N150RT V2.1.6-B20171121.1002 and TOTOLINK-CX-N300RT V2.1.6-B20170724.1

An issue in TOTOLINK-CX-A3002RU V1.0.4-B20171106.1512 and TOTOLINK-CX-N150RT V2.1.6-B20171121.1002 and TOTOLINK-CX-N300RT V2.1.6-B20170724.1420 and TOTOLINK-CX-N300RT V2.1.8-B20171113.1408 and TOTOLINK-CX-N300RT V2.1.8-B20191010.1107 and TOTOLINK-CX-N302RE V2.0.2-B20170511.1523 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the /boafrm/formSysCmd component.

MediumCVSS 6.8 · v3.1—Proof of concept No fix recorded
Published
Nov 27, 2024
Updated
Jun 17, 2026
EPSS
3.9% · 90th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

28

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
27 / 40 · 6.8 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
1 / 30 · 3.9%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation
proof of concept
Automatable
no
Technical impact
total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

VendorProduct
totolinka3002ru firmware
totolinkn150rt firmware
totolinkn300rt firmware
totolinkn302re firmware

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

Proof of concept available

A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.

Evidence

  • Nuclei detection template ×1

Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.

Public exploit evidence
SourceKindDate
Nuclei detection templateNuclei template CVE-2024-51228 —

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Someone on the same network segment can trigger it.
  • Administrator privileges are required.
  • No user action is required.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted
Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
High
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
High
Availability impact
High

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-78 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection')

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

nvd-secondary

Root cause

User input is inserted as text into a shell command. The shell may interpret special characters in the input as part of the command.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-78 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

ts
const host = req.body.host;exec("ping -c 1 " + host, onResult);

Fixed

ts
const host = req.body.host;if (!/^[a-z0-9.-]{1,253}$/i.test(host)) return res.sendStatus(400);execFile("ping", ["-c", "1", host], onResult);

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records