Network Camera Ib8369 FirmwareOperating system · Vivotek

CVE-2017-9828

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-06-23
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
High EPSS Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
'/cgi-bin/admin/testserver.cgi' of the web service in most of the VIVOTEK Network Cameras is vulnerable to shell command injection, which allows remote attackers to execute any shell command as root via a crafted HTTP request. This vulnerability is already verified on VIVOTEK Network Camera IB8369/FD8164/FD816BA; most others have similar firmware that may be affected. An attack uses shell metacharacters in the senderemail parameter.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

VIVOTEK network camera firmware contains a shell command injection vulnerability in the /cgi-bin/admin/testserver.cgi CGI script. Attackers can execute arbitrary shell commands with root privileges by injecting shell metacharacters into the senderemail HTTP parameter. This allows complete device compromise without authentication.

MitigationIsolate affected cameras behind firewalls or VLANs to reduce exposure; apply vendor firmware updates when available; if no patch exists, replace affected devices with supported models.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
Network Camera Ib8369 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= ib8369-vvtk-0102a
Network Camera Fd8164 FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= fd8164-_vvtk-0200b
Network Camera Fd816ba FirmwareOperating system
Affected:= fd816ba-vvtk-010101.

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify the VIVOTEK camera model
    Access the device web interface and look for the model name in the system information page, or query the device via SNMP or HTTP requests to common info endpoints
    Affected if The model is Ib8369, Fd8164, or Fd816ba
  2. Check the installed firmware version
    Locate the firmware version in the device web interface under System > Information or Device Info, or retrieve it via the device's CGI API
    Affected if The firmware version matches exactly: ib8369-vvtk-0102a, fd8164-_vvtk-0200b, or fd816ba-vvtk-010101
  3. Verify the vulnerable CGI script exists
    Send an HTTP GET request to /cgi-bin/admin/testserver.cgi and check for a response
    Affected if The endpoint responds with any content, indicating the CGI script is present and accessible
  4. Confirm the senderemail parameter is accepted
    Send an HTTP POST request to /cgi-bin/admin/testserver.cgi with a senderemail parameter containing test data and observe the response
    Affected if The device accepts the senderemail parameter and processes it without rejecting shell metacharacters

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Isolate affected cameras behind firewalls or VLANs to reduce exposure; apply vendor firmware updates when available; if no patch exists, replace affected devices with supported models.

Fix this in Network Camera Ib8369 Firmware Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9828 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-9828 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data