CVE-2023-5677
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 · uneditedBrandon Rothel from QED Secure Solutions and Sam Hanson of Dragos have found that the VAPIX API tcptest.cgi did not have a sufficient input validation allowing for a possible remote code execution. This flaw can only be exploited after authenticating with an operator- or administrator-privileged service account. The impact of exploiting this vulnerability is lower with operator-privileges compared to administrator-privileges service accounts. Please refer to the Axis security advisory for more information and solution.
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 confidenceA remote code execution vulnerability exists in the VAPIX API tcptest.cgi endpoint on Axis devices due to insufficient input validation. An attacker with valid operator- or administrator-level credentials can exploit this flaw to execute arbitrary code, with higher impact when using administrator 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 data< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7< 5.51.7.7CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Axis device modelAccess the device web interface or query the VAPIX API at /axis-cgi/basicdeviceinfo.cgi to retrieve the model name and serial number.Affected if The device model is one of: M3024-LVE, M3025-VE, M7014, M7016, P1214-E, P7214, P7216, or Q7401.
-
Check the installed firmware versionQuery /axis-cgi/basicdeviceinfo.cgi or check the System > About page in the web interface to retrieve the firmware version.Affected if The firmware version is lower than 5.51.7.7.
-
Confirm VAPIX API is accessibleAttempt to access the VAPIX API base URL (e.g., http://<device-ip>/axis-cgi/) using valid credentials. A successful response indicates the API is enabled.Affected if The VAPIX API responds to authenticated requests.
-
Verify operator or administrator accounts existQuery the VAPIX user/rights API endpoint or check Users in the device administration interface.Affected if Any operator-level or administrator-level user accounts are configured on the device.
-
Check if tcptest.cgi endpoint is reachableSend an authenticated GET request to /axis-cgi/networktest.cgi?tcptest or similar tcptest endpoint. The exact path can be confirmed in Axis documentation.Affected if The tcptest.cgi endpoint responds to authenticated requests, indicating the vulnerable feature is accessible.
The device is affected if it is one of the listed models, runs firmware below 5.51.7.7, has the VAPIX API accessible, and has operator or administrator accounts configured.
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.
dbcve · scoped5.51.7.7
Apply the vendor patch from the Axis security advisory immediately, and restrict VAPIX API access to only trusted, privileged accounts to reduce attack surface.
Firmware version 5.51.7.7 or later for M3024, M3025, M7014, M7016, P1214, P7214, P7216, Q7401
- 1. Obtain the fixed firmware version (5.51.7.7 or later) from the official Axis download portal at www.axis.com/support
- 2. Log in to the affected Axis device web interface with administrator credentials
- 3. Navigate to Settings > System > Upgrade
- 4. Click 'Choose File' and select the downloaded firmware file
- 5. Click 'Upgrade' to apply the firmware update
- 6. Wait for the device to reboot and verify the firmware version shows 5.51.7.7 or later
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-5677 — 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-2023-5677 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