CVE-2026-7240
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 has been found in Totolink A8000RU 7.1cu.643_b20200521. This vulnerability affects the function setVpnAccountCfg of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi of the component CGI Handler. Such manipulation of the argument User leads to os command injection. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
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 confidenceOS command injection vulnerability in Totolink A8000RU router firmware. The setVpnAccountCfg function in /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi accepts user input through the User parameter without proper sanitization, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands on the device with the privileges of the web server process.
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
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Confirm device model is Totolink A8000RUAccess the router web management interface and check the device information page, or check the device label/packaging. Alternatively, make a GET request to the router's IP and examine the HTTP Server header or login page for Totolink branding.Affected if The device is a Totolink A8000RU router.
-
Verify the vulnerable CGI endpoint existsMake an HTTP request to http://<router-ip>/cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi and check for a valid response (200 OK or similar). The existence of this binary indicates the potentially vulnerable code is present.Affected if The /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi endpoint responds to requests, indicating the vulnerable firmware component is installed.
-
Check if the web management interface is externally accessibleDetermine if the router's HTTP/HTTPS ports (typically 80/443) are reachable from untrusted networks by scanning the router's public IP or reviewing firewall rules.Affected if The router's web interface is exposed to untrusted networks, allowing remote attackers to reach the vulnerable endpoint.
-
Inspect firmware version if accessibleIf you can access the router admin panel, navigate to System or Status settings to view the installed firmware version. Compare against any vendor release notes.Affected if The installed firmware version has not been patched to address the command injection vulnerability in setVpnAccountCfg.
You are affected if you operate a Totolink A8000RU router with the vulnerable cstecgi.cgi endpoint exposed to network access, regardless of firmware version, since no specific patched version range was provided.
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 dataApply vendor firmware patch when available; immediately restrict access to the router's web management interface from untrusted networks. If patch unavailable, consider network segmentation or device replacement.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7240 — 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-2026-7240 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