CVE-2024-37855
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 · uneditedAn issue in Nepstech Wifi Router xpon (terminal) NTPL-Xpon1GFEVN, hardware verstion 1.0 firmware 2.0.1 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the router's Telnet port 2345 without requiring authentication credentials.
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 confidencePre-authentication remote code execution vulnerability in Nepstech Wifi Router xpon NTPL-Xpon1GFEVN (firmware 2.0.1). An unauthenticated remote attacker can send arbitrary commands through Telnet service on port 2345, achieving full system compromise without any credentials.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/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 device modelLog into the router admin interface or check the device label/packaging for model number 'NTPL-Xpon1GFEVN' or 'Nepstech Wifi Router xpon'Affected if Device is Nepstech NTPL-Xpon1GFEVN model
-
Check the firmware versionAccess router admin panel or use SNMP/CLI to retrieve firmware version; compare to 2.0.1Affected if Firmware version is 2.0.1 exactly (or if version cannot be determined but device is confirmed as the affected model)
-
Verify Telnet service statusRun 'telnet <router-ip> 2345' or use port scanner (nmap -p 2345 <router-ip>) to check if port 2345 is open and respondingAffected if Telnet service is running and port 2345 is open and accessible
-
Assess network exposure of Telnet portCheck firewall rules or perform external port scan from untrusted network to confirm port 2345 is reachable from outside localhostAffected if Port 2345 is exposed to untrusted networks or the internet without firewall filtering
A user is affected if they own a Nepstech NTPL-Xpon1GFEVN router with firmware 2.0.1 and have Telnet on port 2345 accessible (even locally, as this indicates the vulnerable service is 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 dataImmediately restrict network access to port 2345 via firewall rules or disable the Telnet service if unused. Contact vendor for firmware update; if unavailable, consider network segmentation or device replacement.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $3,168.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-37855 — 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-2024-37855 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