VulnerabilityPublished 2 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-40112: PHP Remote File Inclusion

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:29 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to 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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Jun 2025
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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
n/a n/a	Affected >=1.0 <=1.5	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-40112, European organizations should first inventory their network to identify any Sitecom WLX-2006 devices running vulnerable firmware versions (v1.5 and earlier). Until an official patch is released, organizations should consider the following specific actions: 1) Restrict network access to the range extenders by implementing network segmentation and firewall rules that limit management interface exposure to trusted hosts only. 2) Disable or restrict cookie-based language settings if configurable, or monitor for unusual cookie manipulation attempts in network traffic. 3) Employ network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) with custom signatures to detect attempts to exploit LFI via the "language" cookie parameter. 4) Regularly audit device logs for suspicious access patterns or anomalies. 5) Engage with Sitecom support channels to obtain firmware updates or security advisories and apply patches promptly once available. 6) Consider replacing vulnerable devices with more secure alternatives if patching is not feasible in the short term. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on access controls, monitoring, and proactive device management specific to the affected product and vulnerability vector.

Description

A Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability exists in Sitecom WLX-2006 Wall Mount Range Extender N300 v1.5 and before, which allows an attacker to manipulate the "language" cookie to include arbitrary files from the server. This vulnerability can be exploited to disclose sensitive information.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability depends largely on the deployment of the Sitecom WLX-2006 range extenders within their network infrastructure. These devices are typically used to extend wireless network coverage in small office or home office environments. If exploited, attackers could gain access to sensitive device files, potentially extracting network credentials or configuration details that could facilitate lateral movement or further compromise within the network. This risk is particularly relevant for organizations relying on these devices in less secure network segments or with insufficient network segmentation. The vulnerability could lead to information disclosure, undermining confidentiality, and potentially allow attackers to modify device behavior or disrupt network availability indirectly. Given the medium severity and local attack vector, the threat is more pronounced in environments where attackers have internal network access or can connect to the device's network segment. European organizations with distributed or remote offices using these devices should be especially vigilant, as attackers could exploit this vulnerability to gain footholds in less monitored network areas.

CWE-98Improper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The PHP application receives input from an upstream component, but it does not restrict or incorrectly restricts the input before its usage in "require," "include," or similar functions.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Vulnerable Dependency Management (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V12.3.6 (opens in a new tab)
V14.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
PHP Remote File Inclusion (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Jul 2025, 16:41 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-98

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats