CVE-2024-7206
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 · uneditedSSL Pinning Bypass in eWeLink Some hardware products allows local ATTACKER to Decrypt TLS communication and Extract secrets to clone the device via Flash the modified firmware
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 confidenceSSL pinning can be bypassed in eWeLink smart home devices by flashing modified firmware, allowing a local attacker to decrypt TLS communications and extract secrets for device cloning.
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
- Physical
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 firmware versionAccess the device settings through the eWeLink mobile app or web interface, then navigate to Device Information or About to find the firmware version number.Affected if The installed firmware version is older than the version that implements hardware-backed SSL pinning or secure boot protection.
-
Verify if secure boot is enabledCheck the device security settings in the eWeLink app or through the device's administrative interface for a 'Secure Boot' or 'Bootloader Protection' option and confirm it is turned on.Affected if Secure boot is disabled or not available, allowing modified firmware to be flashed.
-
Check for hardware security module usageReview the device technical specifications or settings for evidence of secure element, TPM, or hardware-backed certificate storage being used for SSL pinning.Affected if The device relies solely on software-based certificate storage that can be overwritten with modified firmware.
-
Confirm SSL pinning is actively enforcedInspect the device network settings or diagnostics to verify SSL pinning is enabled. This may be shown as 'Certificate Pinning', 'SSL Verification', or 'TLS Certificate Validation' in the security settings.Affected if SSL pinning is disabled, optional, or can be disabled by a user without authentication.
-
Test for firmware modification protectionAttempt to access the device's firmware update mechanism and verify if it requires cryptographic signature validation before accepting a firmware image.Affected if The device accepts firmware updates without validating cryptographic signatures, allowing bypass of SSL pinning through modified firmware.
The device is affected if it lacks hardware-backed secure storage for SSL certificates, has secure boot disabled, or accepts unsigned firmware updates, enabling an attacker to bypass SSL pinning by flashing modified firmware.
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 dataImplement SSL pinning using hardware-backed secure storage (e.g., secure element, TPM) or certificate transparency logging to prevent bypass via firmware modification.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation32.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $16,320.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-7206 — 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-2024-7206 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