VulnerabilityPublished 16 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-29521: Shenzhen Hereta Technology Hereta ETH-IMC408M · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Affects Shenzhen Hereta Technology Hereta ETH-IMC408MSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 1% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
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: Active: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a targeted user to perform specific, conscious interactions with the vulnerable system and the attacker’s payload, or the user’s interactions would actively subvert protection mechanisms which would lead to exploitation of the vulnerability.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 to 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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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
Shenzhen Hereta Technology Co., Ltd.Hereta ETH-IMC408M	Affected <=1.0.15	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Immediately restrict access to the device's web management interface to trusted networks and users only, using network segmentation and firewall rules.
Educate users and administrators to avoid visiting untrusted or suspicious websites while logged into the device's management interface.
Implement web browser security measures such as disabling automatic credential submission or using browser extensions that block CSRF attacks.
Monitor device configurations regularly for unauthorized changes and maintain detailed logs for forensic analysis.
If possible, disable HTTP Basic Authentication in favor of more secure authentication methods or require multi-factor authentication.
Contact Shenzhen Hereta Technology for firmware updates or patches addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available.
Consider deploying web application firewalls (WAFs) or intrusion prevention systems (IPS) that can detect and block CSRF attack patterns targeting the device.
Employ Content Security Policy (CSP) headers and SameSite cookie attributes on management interfaces to reduce CSRF risks if the device supports such configurations.

Description

CVE-2026-29521 is a medium-severity cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability affecting Shenzhen Hereta Technology's ETH-IMC408M device firmware version 1.0.15 and earlier. The vulnerability arises from missing CSRF protections in the setup.cgi interface, allowing attackers to craft malicious web pages that submit unauthorized requests using the victim's HTTP Basic Authentication credentials. Exploitation can lead to unauthorized modification of device configurations, including adding RADIUS accounts, changing network settings, or triggering diagnostics. No authentication or privileges are required for exploitation, but user interaction is necessary to visit the malicious page. The vulnerability has a CVSS 4.0 base score of 5.1, reflecting moderate impact and ease of exploitation.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is unauthorized modification of device configurations, which can undermine network security and operational stability. Attackers could add rogue RADIUS accounts, potentially allowing unauthorized network access or interception of authentication traffic. Altering network settings could disrupt connectivity, redirect traffic, or expose the device to further attacks. Triggering diagnostics might be used to gather sensitive information or cause denial of service. Since the device is likely used in network infrastructure environments, such unauthorized changes could have cascading effects on enterprise or industrial network operations. The requirement for user interaction limits large-scale automated exploitation but targeted attacks against administrators or users with access to the device's web interface remain a significant risk. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate threat but does not eliminate the potential for future attacks. Organizations relying on this device should consider the risk of compromise to confidentiality, integrity, and availability of their network infrastructure.

CWE-352Cross-Site Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
Compound weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #3OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
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.
Implementation
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
Architecture and Design
Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking) (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Domain Search Timing (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Identification (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Request Forgery (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 24 Mar 2026, 01:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-352

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats