dbcve.org
Uncontrolled Resource ConsumptionWeakness · CWE-400

CVE-2026-22540

CRITICAL · 9.2 CVSS v4.0 Published 2026-01-07
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The massive sending of ARP requests causes a denial of service on one board of the charger that allows control of the EV interfaces. Since the board must be operating correctly for the charger to also function correctly.

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 confidence

A denial of service vulnerability exists in EV charger firmware where massive ARP request traffic overwhelms a specific board responsible for controlling EV charging interfaces. The targeted board becomes unresponsive, causing the entire charger to fail since the board must operate correctly for charging functionality.

MitigationImplement network segmentation to isolate the charger management interface from untrusted networks, configure ARP traffic rate limiting on upstream switches/routers, and apply vendor-provided firmware patches when available.

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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if the system is an EV charger device
    Review system documentation, device model information, or firmware identification strings to confirm the device is an EV charger. Check manufacturer labels or management interface for device type designation.
    Affected if The device is an EV charger with network-connected charging control boards
  2. Confirm the charging management interface is network-accessible
    Check if the EV charger management or control plane network interface has an IP address assigned and is reachable from network segments. Examine network configuration or interface status.
    Affected if The management interface is actively configured with network connectivity and reachable from external or untrusted network segments
  3. Verify the EV charging control board is operational
    Check the status of charging control boards or modules through the device management interface, diagnostics, or status commands. Look for board health or module status indicators.
    Affected if The charging control board is running and dependent on network communication for operation
  4. Check for ARP traffic rate limiting or filtering capability
    Examine network device configuration upstream from the EV charger, or charger network settings, for ARP traffic rate limiting, storm control, or ARP inspection features.
    Affected if No ARP traffic rate limiting or filtering is configured on the network path to the charger
  5. Assess network segmentation of the charger management interface
    Determine whether the EV charger management interface shares a network segment with untrusted or external systems, or is isolated on a dedicated management VLAN.
    Affected if The charger management interface is on the same network segment as untrusted or external systems without isolation

If the device is an EV charger with an active network-connected management interface exposed to untrusted networks and lacking ARP traffic controls, it may be vulnerable to the ARP-based denial of service affecting the charging control board.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement network segmentation to isolate the charger management interface from untrusted networks, configure ARP traffic rate limiting on upstream switches/routers, and apply vendor-provided firmware patches when available.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
30.0 hours of engineering $5,280
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,448.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-22540 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-22540 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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