CVE-2022-35491
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 · uneditedTOTOLINK A3002RU V3.0.0-B20220304.1804 has a hardcoded password for root in /etc/shadow.sample.
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 confidenceThe TOTOLINK A3002RU router firmware V3.0.0-B20220304.1804 contains a hardcoded root password stored in /etc/shadow.sample. This file, typically meant as a template, exposes a static credential that could allow an attacker to gain unauthenticated root access to the device.
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= 3.0.0-b20220304.1804CVSS 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:3.1/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the router modelAccess the router's web interface or check the device label to confirm it is a Totolink A3002RU model.Affected if The device is not a Totolink A3002RU router.
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the router's web interface and navigate to the firmware/version information page, or use the router's administration CLI if available, to determine the exact firmware version.Affected if The firmware version is NOT exactly V3.0.0-B20220304.1804.
-
Locate the shadow.sample fileIf you have access to the firmware image or filesystem (through firmware extraction or a shell on the device), search for the file /etc/shadow.sample.Affected if The file /etc/shadow.sample does not exist on the device or in the firmware.
-
Inspect for hardcoded credentialsExamine the contents of /etc/shadow.sample and look for a root password hash entry. Compare the root hash entry against known hardcoded password patterns for this CVE.Affected if The /etc/shadow.sample file contains a root password entry with a hardcoded hash that differs from the device's actual root password or is documented as the hardcoded credential for this vulnerability.
You are affected if you have a Totolink A3002RU router running firmware version V3.0.0-B20220304.1804 with a hardcoded root password present in /etc/shadow.sample.
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 firmware update when available; until then, restrict network access to the device and monitor for unauthorized access attempts.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,624.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-35491 — 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-2022-35491 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