Uncontrolled Resource ConsumptionWeakness · CWE-400

CVE-2026-22541

HIGH · 8.2 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 →
91/100
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 ICMP requests causes a denial of service on one of the boards from the EVCharger that allows control 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 the EVCharger board that controls EV interfaces. An attacker can trigger the DoS condition by sending a massive volume of ICMP (ping) requests, causing the board to become unresponsive and preventing proper EV charging operations.

MitigationImplement network-based ICMP rate limiting and firewall rules to restrict ICMP traffic from untrusted sources. Consider network segmentation to isolate EV charging infrastructure and deploy IDS/IPS to detect and block ICMP flood attacks.

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:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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 checks

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

  1. Identify EVCharger board presence
    Inventory network-connected charging infrastructure. Check for EVCharger boards or similar EV charging control hardware in the environment. Review device documentation or network topology for EV charging controller assets.
    Affected if EVCharger board or EV charging controller hardware is deployed in the network without explicit network isolation from untrusted traffic sources.
  2. Verify ICMP accessibility to EVCharger
    From an external or untrusted network segment, attempt to ping the EVCharger board IP address using standard ICMP echo request (ping). Alternatively, review firewall logs for permitted ICMP traffic to the EVCharger device.
    Affected if ICMP echo requests to the EVCharger IP address succeed or are permitted through network boundaries without restriction.
  3. Check for ICMP rate limiting configuration
    Access the EVCharger board management interface or network device configuration. Look for ICMP rate-limit settings, traffic shaping policies, or storm prevention configurations applied to the EVCharger network interface.
    Affected if No ICMP rate limiting, throttling, or storm control is configured on the EVCharger or its upstream network device.
  4. Review firewall rules for ICMP traffic
    Examine firewall or ACL configurations governing traffic to the EVCharger subnet. Identify whether ICMP (protocol 1) is explicitly allowed, blocked, or limited for inbound traffic to EV charging control systems.
    Affected if Firewall rules permit unrestricted or unrate-limited ICMP traffic from untrusted sources to the EVCharger.
  5. Assess network segmentation
    Evaluate network architecture diagrams or perform traceroute/ping tests from non-trusted segments toward the EVCharger. Determine if the EVCharger resides in a DMZ, isolated VLAN, or behind proper network segmentation from external-facing networks.
    Affected if EVCharger board is directly accessible from untrusted network segments without passing through a DMZ or isolated network segment.

The environment is affected if an EVCharger board is deployed and ICMP traffic to the device is not rate-limited, firewalled, or network-segmented from untrusted sources.

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-based ICMP rate limiting and firewall rules to restrict ICMP traffic from untrusted sources. Consider network segmentation to isolate EV charging infrastructure and deploy IDS/IPS to detect and block ICMP flood attacks.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
16.0 hours of engineering $2,840
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-22541 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-22541 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