CVE-2026-2702VulnerabilityPublished 19 Feb 2026Updated 24 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-2702: Beetel 777VR1 · Hard-coded Credentials

Affects Beetel 777VR1Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 2.3 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 07:57 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

2.3Low

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 20% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Adjacent
Attack Complexity: High
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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

Attack Vector: Adjacent: The vulnerable system is bound to a protocol stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared proximity (e.g., Bluetooth, NFC, or IEEE 802.11) or logical network (e.g., local IP subnet), or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN within an administrative network zone).
Attack Complexity: High: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 19 Feb 2026
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Beetel777VR1	Affected =01.00.09	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately assess their deployment of Beetel 777VR1 devices and verify firmware versions. Since no patches are currently available, network-level mitigations are critical. These include: 1) Restricting physical and wireless access to trusted users only, ensuring strong network access controls and segmentation to isolate vulnerable devices from untrusted users or guest networks. 2) Monitoring network traffic for unusual authentication attempts or connections involving the affected devices. 3) Disabling or limiting WPA2 PSK usage if possible, or replacing affected devices with models from vendors that provide timely security updates. 4) Employing network intrusion detection/prevention systems (IDS/IPS) to detect exploitation attempts. 5) Regularly auditing device configurations and network access logs to identify suspicious activity. 6) Engaging with the vendor or community for updates or unofficial patches. 7) Considering alternative secure authentication mechanisms such as WPA3 where supported. These steps help reduce the risk until an official patch or firmware update is released.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in Beetel 777VR1 up to 01.00.09. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component WPA2 PSK. Performing a manipulation results in hard-coded credentials. The attacker must have access to the local network to execute the attack. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitability is assessed as difficult. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-2702 is unauthorized access to the local network through exploitation of hard-coded WPA2 PSK credentials. This can lead to confidentiality breaches, allowing attackers to intercept or manipulate network traffic, potentially compromising sensitive data. Integrity and availability impacts are less likely given the nature of the vulnerability and the difficulty of exploitation. However, if exploited, attackers could potentially alter device configurations or launch further attacks within the network. Organizations relying on Beetel 777VR1 routers in sensitive environments may face increased risk of lateral movement by attackers once inside the local network. The limited attack vector (local network access required) reduces the scope but does not eliminate risk, especially in environments with weak internal network segmentation or guest access controls. The lack of vendor response and patch availability prolongs exposure, increasing the window for potential exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Feb 2026, 13:05 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats