Yeahlink Ultra-elegant IP Phone SIP-T41P 66.83.0.35 Diagnostics Web Interface File path traversal
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 7.1 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability has been found in Yeahlink Ultra-elegant IP Phone SIP-T41P 66.83.0.35 and classified as critical. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component Diagnostics Web Interface. The manipulation of the argument File as part of POST Request leads to path traversal. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2018-16221. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists.
Details
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Yeahlink Ultra-elegant IP Phone SIP-T41P 66.83.0.35 (IP Phone Software). This issue affects an unknown part of the component Diagnostics Web Interface. The manipulation of the argument file as part of a POST Request leads to a path traversal vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-22. The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory. Impacted is confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
The diagnostics web interface in the Yeahlink Ultra-elegant IP Phone SIP-T41P (firmware 66.83.0.35) does not validate (escape) the path information (path traversal), which allows an authenticated remote attacker to get access to privileged information (e.g., /etc/passwd) via path traversal (relative path information in the file parameter of the corresponding POST request).
The weakness was disclosed 05/29/2019. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2018-16221 since 08/30/2018. The attack may be initiated remotely. A simple authentication is necessary for exploitation. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1006 for this issue.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
The entries VDB-135676 and VDB-135675 are pretty similar. If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.1VulDB Meta Temp Score: 7.1
VulDB Base Score: 6.3
VulDB Temp Score: 6.3
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 8.0
NVD Vector: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Path traversalCWE: CWE-22
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
08/30/2018 🔍05/29/2019 🔍
05/30/2019 🔍
09/25/2023 🔍
Sources
Advisory: sit.fraunhofer.deStatus: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2018-16221 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2018-16221
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-135677
See also: 🔍
Entry
Created: 05/30/2019 07:17Updated: 09/25/2023 06:43
Changes: 05/30/2019 07:17 (38), 06/16/2020 21:18 (18), 09/25/2023 06:43 (3)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.