Zyxel Multiple NAS Devices OS Command Injection Vulnerability
Exploited since 2022-03-25. No WAF vendor names it yet. Our CRS test: blocked.
Multiple ZyXEL network-attached storage (NAS) devices running firmware version 5.21 contain a pre-authentication command injection vulnerability, which may allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code on a vulnerable… More
Multiple ZyXEL network-attached storage (NAS) devices running firmware version 5.21 contain a pre-authentication command injection vulnerability, which may allow a remote, unauthenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code on a vulnerable device. ZyXEL NAS devices achieve authentication by using the weblogin.cgi CGI executable. This program fails to properly sanitize the username parameter that is passed to it. If the username parameter contains certain characters, it can allow command injection with the privileges of the web server that runs on the ZyXEL device. Although the web server does not run as the root user, ZyXEL devices include a setuid utility that can be leveraged to run any command with root privileges. As such, it should be assumed that exploitation of this vulnerability can lead to remote code execution with root privileges. By sending a specially-crafted HTTP POST or GET request to a vulnerable ZyXEL device, a remote, unauthenticated attacker may be able to execute arbitrary code on the device. This may happen by directly connecting to a device if it is directly exposed to an attacker. However, there are ways to trigger such crafted requests even if an attacker does not have direct connectivity to a vulnerable devices. For example, simply visiting a website can result in the compromise of any ZyXEL device that is reachable from the client system. Affected products include: NAS326 before firmware V5.21(AAZF.7)C0 NAS520 before firmware V5.21(AASZ.3)C0 NAS540 before firmware V5.21(AATB.4)C0 NAS542 before firmware V5.21(ABAG.4)C0 ZyXEL has made firmware updates available for NAS326, NAS520, NAS540, and NAS542 devices. Affected models that are end-of-support: NSA210, NSA220, NSA220+, NSA221, NSA310, NSA310S, NSA320, NSA320S, NSA325 and NSA325v2
Edge coverage
Claimed by vendorsAsk Vigil
AI · answers from this pageWorkers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.
Severity, decoded
CVSS 3.1Exploitable over the network, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality, integrity and availability.
How the score is built
- Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.Network
- Attack complexityNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.Low
- Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.None
- User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.None
- ScopeThe damage stays within the vulnerable component.Unchanged
- Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.High
- Integrity impactAn attacker can change any data or files the affected component protects.High
- Availability impactAn attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HAttackers are exploiting this in the wild.
At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.
A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.
Public exploits
1 found- NucleiCVE-2020-9054.yamldetection template, replayed in our lab
Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.
Timeline
- 2020-03-04CVE publishedCVE List
- 2022-03-25Added to CISA KEVConfirmed exploitation in the wild
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set blocked itparanoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set blocked itparanoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
Vendor statements
QuotedCloudflareWAF Managed Rules
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
AWSAWS WAF Managed Rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.
Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.
Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rules
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patches
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)
This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.
OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
Social
No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.