CVE-2023-22920
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 security misconfiguration vulnerability exists in the Zyxel LTE3316-M604 firmware version V2.00(ABMP.6)C0 due to a factory default misconfiguration intended for testing purposes. A remote attacker could leverage this vulnerability to access an affected device using Telnet.
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 Zyxel LTE3316-M604 firmware V2.00(ABMP.6)C0 contains a factory default misconfiguration that enables remote Telnet access. This was left intentionally for testing but was never disabled before production release, allowing unauthenticated remote attackers to connect to the device over Telnet and potentially execute commands or extract sensitive information.
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= 1.00\(abwf.1\)c0= 2.00\(abmp.6\)c0CVSS 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 device modelLocate the device label or access the admin interface to confirm the model is LTE3316-M604 or LTE3202-M437Affected if Device is either LTE3316-M604 or LTE3202-M437
-
Check firmware versionAccess the device administration interface (typically via web GUI at 192.168.1.1 or similar) and navigate to Status or System Info to view the firmware version. Compare against affected versions: LTE3316-M604 firmware = 2.00(ABMP.6)C0, LTE3202-M437 firmware = 1.00(abwf.1)c0Affected if Firmware version matches exactly 2.00(ABMP.6)C0 for LTE3316-M604 or 1.00(abwf.1)c0 for LTE3202-M437
-
Verify Telnet service statusFrom a computer on the same network, attempt to connect to the device using Telnet on port 23 (e.g., run 'telnet <device_ip>' in command prompt). If connection succeeds, Telnet is enabledAffected if Telnet connection succeeds and provides device access without authentication
-
Check if Telnet allows remote accessAttempt Telnet connection from an external network (outside the local LAN) or check the device firewall/security settings to determine if remote Telnet connections from WAN are permittedAffected if Telnet is accessible from WAN/external networks
The device is affected if it is a Zyxel LTE3316-M604 or LTE3202-M437 with the specific vulnerable firmware version AND Telnet service is enabled and accessible.
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 any available firmware update from Zyxel that removes the testing Telnet access; if no update exists, disable Telnet via device administration interface and ensure the device is not directly exposed to the internet.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-22920 — 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-2023-22920 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