A firmware update vulnerability exists in the "update" firmware checks functionality of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102.
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- 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: 0.90% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 59.2% 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.
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; 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
A firmware update vulnerability exists in the "update" firmware checks functionality of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102. A specially-crafted HTTP request can lead to firmware update. An attacker can send a sequence of requests to trigger this vulnerability.
- Published
- Jan 28, 2022
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.9% · 59th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-347
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.9%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 7.5
- CNA · talos
- 8.3
- 0.8 point gap
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| reolink | rlc-410w firmware | cpe:2.3:o:reolink:rlc-410w_firmware |
| reolink | rlc-410w | cpe:2.3:h:reolink:rlc-410w |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- reolink rlc-410w firmware3.0.0.136_20121102
Same product
reolink: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2021-40407An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the device network settings functionality of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102.KEV72This week
- CVE-2019-11001On Reolink RLC-410W, C1 Pro, C2 Pro, RLC-422W, and RLC-511W devices through 1.0.227, an authenticated admin can use the "TestEmail" functionKEV69This week
- CVE-2021-40409An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the device network settings functionality of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102.40Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2021-40419Jan 28, 2022 · A firmware update vulnerability exists in the 'factory' binary of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102.30Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2021-40423Jan 28, 2022 · A denial of service vulnerability exists in the cgiserver.cgi API command parser functionality of Reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102.30Monitor
- Later →CVE-2022-21199Jan 28, 2022 · An information disclosure vulnerability exists due to the hardcoded TLS key of reolink RLC-410W v3.0.0.136_20121102.23Monitor
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
- none
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-347 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic SignatureCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
nvd-primary
Root cause
The verifier takes the algorithm to verify with from the token’s own header. Untrusted data ends up deciding its own verification rule.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-347 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey);Fixed
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey, { algorithms: ["RS256"], issuer: "https://id.example.com", audience: "portal",});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)
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.