CVE-2023-46892
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 · uneditedThe radio frequency communication protocol being used by Meross MSH30Q 4.5.23 is vulnerable to replay attacks, allowing attackers to record and replay previously captured communication to execute unauthorized commands or actions (e.g., thermostat's temperature).
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 confidenceThe Meross MSH30Q thermostat version 4.5.23 uses a radio frequency communication protocol lacking replay attack protection. Attackers can intercept and record valid RF commands, then retransmit them to execute unauthorized actions like changing temperature settings.
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= 4.5.23CVSS 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 physical device label or Meross app device info to confirm the model is MSH30Q thermostatAffected if Device model is not Meross MSH30Q (not affected)
-
Check firmware versionOpen Meross app, select the MSH30Q device, go to Settings or Device Info, and record the firmware version numberAffected if Firmware version is exactly 4.5.23 (vulnerable)
-
Verify RF communication is in useCheck device settings or documentation to confirm RF (radio frequency) communication is enabled between the thermostat and any hub or controllerAffected if RF communication is active and firmware is 4.5.23 (vulnerable to replay attacks)
-
Inspect RF signal exposureUse an RF scanner or spectrum analyzer in the device vicinity to detect active RF transmissions from the thermostatAffected if Active RF signals detected from the device (potential attack surface exists)
A user is affected if they own a Meross MSH30Q thermostat running firmware version 4.5.23 with RF communication enabled.
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 dataThe vendor must implement cryptographic protections in the RF protocol (e.g., message authentication codes, rolling codes/nonces, or timestamps) via a firmware update. Users should minimize RF signal exposure until the patch is applied.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation20.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $11,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-46892 — 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-2023-46892 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