Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

CVE-2022-20703

Multiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Small Business RV160, RV260, RV340, and RV345 Series Routers could allow an attacker to do any of the following: Execute…

High Known exploited
Severity
8.0 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
9.20%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 95.34% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
Yes
In CISA's catalog since Mar 3, 2022
Weakness
CWE-121 Stack-based Buffer Overflow
CWE-295 Improper Certificate Validation
Fix
None yet
No fixed version published
Exploited in the wild. Cisco Small Business RV Series Routers Stack-based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability (Cisco Small Business RV160, RV260, RV340, and RV345 Series Routers). Required action: Apply updates per vendor instructions. Due for U.S. federal agencies by Mar 17, 2022.

Description

Multiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Small Business RV160, RV260, RV340, and RV345 Series Routers could allow an attacker to do any of the following: Execute arbitrary code Elevate privileges Execute arbitrary commands Bypass authentication and authorization protections Fetch and run unsigned software Cause denial of service (DoS) For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.

How to fix

No fixed version has been published yet. Until one is, remove or replace the package, or turn off or isolate the affected feature. This page updates when a fix ships.

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.0

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

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-121: Stack-based Buffer Overflow

A stack-based buffer overflow condition is a condition where the buffer being overwritten is allocated on the stack (i.e., is a local variable or, rarely, a parameter to a function).

How to prevent it
  • Operation, Build and Compilation: Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.
  • Architecture and Design: Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
  • Implementation: Implement and perform bounds checking on input.
  • Implementation: Do not use dangerous functions such as gets. Use safer, equivalent functions which check for boundary errors.
  • Operation, Build and Compilation: Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program's executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code. Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as "rebasing" (for Windows) and "prelinking" (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking. For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

CWE-295: Improper Certificate Validation

The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design, Implementation: Certificates should be carefully managed and checked to assure that data are encrypted with the intended owner's public key.
  • Implementation: If certificate pinning is being used, ensure that all relevant properties of the certificate are fully validated before the certificate is pinned, including the hostname.

References

Advisories

Other links

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Added to CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
  3. Remediation due for U.S. federal agencies
  4. Last updated by the source
  5. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
CVE-2021-27137
An issue was discovered in router/upnp/src/ssdp.c in DD-WRT before 45724.
High Known exploited Same weakness, CWE-121
GHSA-mmjf-rqrv-855v
Microsoft Security Advisory CVE-2026-50527 – .NET Denial of Service Vulnerability
High Same weakness, CWE-121
GHSA-3v45-f3vh-wg7m
Oj: Stack Buffer Overflow in Oj.dump via Large Indent
High Same weakness, CWE-121
CVE-2026-7273
A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the CGI program of Zyxel GS1900-48HPv2 firmware versions through 2.90(ABTQ.1)C0 could allow a LAN-based,…
High Known exploited Same weakness, CWE-121
GHSA-ghm9-cr32-g9qj
rust-openssl: rustMdCtxRef::digest_final() writes past caller buffer with no length check
High Same weakness, CWE-121
GHSA-98cp-rj9f-6v5g
ImageMagick has has a stack-buffer-overflow in MNG encoder with oversized pallete
Medium Same weakness, CWE-121
GHSA-6588-8gv4-xfgh
Microsoft Security Advisory CVE-2026-32203 – .NET and Visual Studio Denial of Service Vulnerability
High Same weakness, CWE-121
GHSA-8793-7xv6-82cf
ImageMagick has an Out-of-bounds Write via InterpretImageFilename
Medium Same weakness, CWE-121
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor