CVE-2024-28550VulnerabilityPublished 18 Mar 2024Updated 2 Aug 2024

CVE-2024-28550: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Mar 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

1. Network Segmentation: Isolate Tenda AC18 routers from critical network segments to limit exposure if compromised. 2. Access Control: Restrict network access to the router’s management interfaces to trusted IP addresses only, using firewall rules or VLAN segmentation. 3. Firmware Monitoring: Regularly check Tenda’s official channels for firmware updates addressing this vulnerability and apply patches promptly once available. 4. Disable Unnecessary Services: If possible, disable DLNA or related services that invoke the vulnerable formExpandDlnaFile function to reduce attack surface. 5. Intrusion Detection: Deploy network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) to monitor for unusual traffic patterns or exploit attempts targeting the router. 6. Privilege Minimization: Limit user privileges on the router to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. 7. Vendor Engagement: Contact Tenda support for guidance and request timelines for patch releases. 8. Incident Response Preparedness: Prepare to isolate or replace affected devices quickly if exploitation is suspected. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on network-level controls, service hardening, and proactive vendor communication.

Description

Tenda AC18 V15.03.05.05 has a stack overflow vulnerability in the filePath parameter of formExpandDlnaFile function.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-28550 is on the integrity of affected Tenda AC18 routers. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause the device to behave unpredictably, potentially disrupting network functionality. Although confidentiality and availability impacts are not directly indicated, compromised router integrity can lead to broader security issues such as unauthorized network access, traffic interception, or denial of service through device instability. Organizations relying on Tenda AC18 routers for home or small office networking could face increased risk of network compromise. The requirement for low privileges and network access lowers the barrier for exploitation, especially in environments where the router interfaces are exposed or poorly segmented. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the potential for future attacks. The lack of available patches means affected organizations must rely on interim mitigations to protect their networks.

CWE-121Stack-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #14
A stack-based buffer overflow condition is a condition where the buffer being overwritten is allocated on the stack (i.e., is a local variable or, rarely, a parameter to a function).
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Implementation
Implement and perform bounds checking on input.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/abcdefg-png/IoT-vulnerable/blob/main/Tenda/AC18/formExpandDlnaFile.md (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 10:22 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-121

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats