CVE-2022-26941
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 · uneditedA format string vulnerability exists in Motorola MTM5000 series firmware AT command handler for the AT+CTGL command. An attacker-controllable string is improperly handled, allowing for a write-anything-anywhere scenario. This can be leveraged to obtain arbitrary code execution inside the teds_app binary, which runs with root privileges.
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 · moderate confidenceA format string vulnerability exists in the Motorola MTM5000 series firmware AT command handler for the AT+CTGL command. The handler improperly processes an attacker-controllable string, enabling a write-anything-anywhere primitive that can be leveraged to achieve arbitrary code execution within the teds_app binary running with root privileges.
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 dataall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify device modelCheck the device label or use AT commands (AT+CGMM or AT+CGMI) to confirm the model is Motorola Mtm5500 or Mtm5400Affected if Model is Mtm5500 or Mtm5400 from Motorola
-
Confirm firmware versionQuery firmware version via AT command (AT+CGMR) or check system information page. Note: all versions of Mtm5500 and Mtm5400 firmware are affectedAffected if Firmware version belongs to Mtm5500 or Mtm5400 product line (all versions)
-
Verify teds_app binary existsAccess the device shell (via serial debug port or authorized remote access) and check for the existence of the teds_app binary, typically found in /usr/bin/ or /sbin/Affected if teds_app binary is present on the device
-
Check AT command interface accessibilityDetermine if the AT command interface (serial port, telnet, or network service) is exposed to untrusted users or network segmentsAffected if AT command interface is accessible from untrusted input sources
-
Verify AT+CTGL command is availableSend AT+CTGL=? to the device AT command interpreter and check for a valid response indicating the command is implementedAffected if AT+CTGL command responds and is executable
If the device is a Motorola Mtm5500 or Mtm5400 with an accessible AT command interface that includes the AT+CTGL command, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 dataApply vendor-supplied firmware patches for the MTM5000 series; if unavailable, implement input validation on all AT command handlers to sanitize format string specifiers before processing user input.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-26941 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-26941 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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