Teltonika RUT9XX routers with firmware before 00.04.233 are prone to multiple unauthenticated OS command injection vulnerabilities in autolo
Noroxi assessment
Priority: This week (action score 60/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 70.6% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 99.3% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Don’t wait for the next maintenance window. Until a fix is released, restrict access to the affected component and follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Teltonika RUT9XX routers with firmware before 00.04.233 are prone to multiple unauthenticated OS command injection vulnerabilities in autologin.cgi and hotspotlogin.cgi due to insufficient user input sanitization. This allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges.
- Published
- Oct 15, 2018
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 70.7% · 99th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-78
Report tools
Action score
60
This week
Don’t wait for the next maintenance window.
- CVSS
- 39 / 40 · 9.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 21 / 30 · 70.7%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| teltonika | rut900 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:teltonika:rut900_firmware |
| teltonika | rut900 | cpe:2.3:h:teltonika:rut900 |
| teltonika | rut950 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:teltonika:rut950_firmware |
| teltonika | rut950 | cpe:2.3:h:teltonika:rut950 |
| teltonika | rut955 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:teltonika:rut955_firmware |
| teltonika | rut955 | cpe:2.3:h:teltonika:rut955 |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- teltonika rut900 firmwarebefore 00.04.233
- teltonika rut950 firmwarebefore 00.04.233
- teltonika rut955 firmwarebefore 00.04.233
Same product
teltonika: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2017-8116The management interface for the Teltonika RUT9XX routers (aka LuCI) with firmware 00.03.265 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute 40Plan
- CVE-2018-17534Teltonika RUT9XX routers with firmware before 00.04.233 provide a root terminal on a serial interface without proper access control.27Monitor
- CVE-2018-17533Teltonika RUT9XX routers with firmware before 00.05.01.1 are prone to cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in hotspotlogin.cgi due to insuff25Monitor
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
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
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.
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 researchersFinders, 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
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is 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
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- 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:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
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 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const host = req.body.host;exec("ping -c 1 " + host, onResult);Fixed
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.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Command DelimitersCAPEC-15likelihood: High · High
- Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation LayersCAPEC-43likelihood: Medium · High
- Argument InjectionCAPEC-6likelihood: High · High
- OS Command InjectionCAPEC-88likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.