Cleartext TransmissionWeakness · CWE-319

CVE-2026-24060

CRITICAL · 9.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-03-21
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
Service information is not encrypted when transmitted as BACnet packets over the wire, and can be sniffed, intercepted, and modified by an attacker. Valuable information such as the File Start Position and File Data can be sniffed from network traffic using Wireshark's BACnet dissector filter. The proprietary format used by WebCTRL to receive updates from the PLC can also be sniffed and reverse engineered.

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

BACnet packets transmitting service information (including File Start Position and File Data) are sent unencrypted over the network, allowing attackers to sniff, intercept, and modify this data using tools like Wireshark. The proprietary protocol between WebCTRL and PLC is also vulnerable to sniffing and reverse engineering due to lack of encryption.

MitigationImplement encryption for BACnet communications (BACnet Secure Connect or VPN tunneling) and encrypt the proprietary protocol between WebCTRL and PLC to prevent sniffing and modification of sensitive operational data.

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
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

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 BACnet deployment in the environment
    Review network documentation, scan for open BACnet ports (UDP 47808 is default for BACnet/IP), or check running services on devices like controllers, gateways, and building automation systems.
    Affected if BACnet or BACnet/IP services are running and communicating on the network.
  2. Verify encryption configuration for BACnet communications
    Check configuration files, management interfaces, or device settings for TLS-wrapped BACnet, BACnet/SC (Secure Connect), or any encryption-enabled mode. Look for settings like 'enable TLS', 'encryption', or 'secure mode'.
    Affected if Encryption is disabled or set to plaintext/unencrypted mode.
  3. Capture and inspect BACnet network traffic
    Use a network sniffer (such as Wireshark) to capture BACnet packets on the segment. Filter by BACnet protocol (or UDP port 47808). Examine packet contents for plaintext readable data.
    Affected if BACnet packets contain readable plaintext application layer data (such as File Start Position, File Data, or other BACnet property values) rather than encrypted payloads.
  4. Check for network-level encryption protecting BACnet traffic
    Review VPN configurations, IPsec tunnels, or network segmentation that may encapsulate BACnet traffic. Verify if BACnet communications traverse encrypted tunnels.
    Affected if No VPN, IPsec, or other network-level encryption is in place for the BACnet traffic segment being analyzed.

If BACnet communications are transmitted in plaintext without TLS, BACnet/SC, VPN, or other encryption, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.

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 encryption for BACnet communications (BACnet Secure Connect or VPN tunneling) and encrypt the proprietary protocol between WebCTRL and PLC to prevent sniffing and modification of sensitive operational data.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation12.0 h
  • Implementation32.0 h
  • Testing20.0 h
  • Review / QA12.0 h
76.0 hours of engineering $13,320
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $21,312.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-24060 — 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-2026-24060 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