CVE-2024-41710
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 vulnerability in the Mitel 6800 Series, 6900 Series, and 6900w Series SIP Phones, including the 6970 Conference Unit, through R6.4.0.HF1 (R6.4.0.136) could allow an authenticated attacker with administrative privilege to conduct an argument injection attack, due to insufficient parameter sanitization during the boot process. A successful exploit could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary commands within the context of the system.
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 vulnerability in Mitel 6800/6900 Series SIP phones and the 6970 Conference Unit through firmware R6.4.0.HF1 allows authenticated attackers with administrative privileges to conduct argument injection during the boot process due to insufficient parameter sanitization, potentially achieving arbitrary command execution.
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<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136<= 6.4.0.136CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/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 modelAccess the phone's web interface or check the device label to confirm it is a Mitel 6800/6900 Series phone (models: 6970, 6940w, 6930w, 6920w, 6920, 6915, 6910, 6905)Affected if The device is one of these specific Mitel phone models
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the phone's web administrative interface and navigate to Status or About page to view the firmware version. Alternatively, access the device via SIP banner or CDP/LLDP to identify the firmware revisionAffected if The firmware version is 6.4.0.136 or earlier (or any version prior to the patched R6.4.0.HF1 release)
-
Verify administrative access exposureDetermine if the phone's web administrative interface (default ports 80/443) is reachable from untrusted networks. Check router/firewall rules and port forwarding configurationsAffected if The administrative web interface is accessible from external/untrusted networks or the internet
-
Review access logs for administrative activityCheck the phone's system logs or external firewall/network logs for failed login attempts, successful administrative logins from unusual IP addresses, or unexpected configuration changesAffected if There are unauthorized or suspicious administrative login attempts or configuration modifications
You are affected if you operate any Mitel 6800/6900 Series phone (6970, 6940w, 6930w, 6920w, 6920, 6915, 6910, 6905) running firmware version 6.4.0.136 or earlier AND your administrative interface is accessible to untrusted users.
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 · scopedApply the vendor-provided firmware patch to address the parameter sanitization issue and limit administrative access to trusted personnel only.
Contact Mitel for the specific R6.4.0.HF1 patched release (version higher than 6.4.0.136)
- 1. Identify the current firmware version on the affected Mitel SIP phone by accessing the web interface or checking the device settings.
- 2. Download the latest firmware version from Mitel's official support website (www.mitel.com) or contact Mitel technical support for the patched firmware.
- 3. Access the phone's administrative web interface using an account with administrative privileges.
- 4. Navigate to the firmware upgrade section (typically under Administration > Software Update or similar).
- 5. Upload and apply the new firmware version, ensuring the device remains powered throughout the upgrade process.
- 6. After the upgrade completes, verify the new firmware version is installed and test that the device functions normally.
- 7. Confirm the installed version is higher than 6.4.0.136 and specifically request or verify it includes the R6.4.0.HF1 security fix from Mitel.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-41710 — 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-2024-41710 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