Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
ReconGain MitM position on VMS network path
-
DeliveryIntercept outbound GV-VMS-to-GV-Cloud connection
-
ExploitCraft oversized malicious server response payload
-
InstallDeliver payload to GV-Cloud client handler
-
C2Trigger stack-based buffer overflow (CWE-121)
-
ExecuteCrash GV-VMS process
-
ImpactLoss of camera feeds and recording
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
ASVS 5.0
V15 - Secure Coding and Architecture Stack buffer bounds checking
MITRE ATT&CK
1 technique across 1 tactic: Execution The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Exploitation requires the attacker to occupy a network-intercept position capable of impersonating the GeoVision GV-Cloud server - specifically achievable through ARP spoofing on the same LAN segment as the GV-VMS host, DNS cache poisoning targeting the cloud server hostname, BGP-level route injection, or deployment of a rogue access point. The GV-Cloud feature must be enabled and the VMS must be actively initiating or maintaining a connection to the cloud server at the time of attack. UI:R indicates a user-driven or scheduled event (such as a login, sync, or keepalive cycle) must trigger the connection. The vendor-assigned PR:H metric suggests an undocumented authentication prerequisite that is not explained by the description - teams should verify with GeoVision whether VMS admin credentials or OS-level access are required before triggering the vulnerable path. Deployments that do not use GV-Cloud connectivity are not affected. |
| Impact | The vendor-assigned CVSS 3.1 score of 6.2 (Medium) reflects genuinely constrained attack conditions: AV:N confirms the attack is network-reachable, but AC:H (attacker must successfully impersonate the cloud server) materially limits the realistic attacker pool to those capable of DNS poisoning, ARP spoofing, rogue-AP deployment, or network-path hijacking. The PR:H metric assigned by the vendor is in tension with the described impersonation attack, which typically maps to PR:N - teams should clarify with GeoVision whether additional authentication is actually required. UI:R further constrains exploitation to windows when the VMS initiates a cloud connection. S:C and A:H together indicate that a successful exploit does not merely affect the GV-Cloud component in isolation but crashes the broader VMS process, taking down all camera feeds and recording. EPSS data is absent from the provided input and cannot be cited numerically. No CISA KEV listing and no public exploit code are identified, making this a medium-priority hardening item rather than an emergency patch. Operational risk is elevated in physical-security contexts where camera downtime directly impacts safety and compliance. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An attacker positioned on the network path between a GV-VMS host and the GeoVision cloud endpoint - via ARP poisoning on a shared LAN segment, DNS hijacking, or rogue Wi-Fi access point - intercepts an outbound cloud connection initiated by the VMS software. The attacker responds with a specially crafted network payload that exceeds the stack buffer allocated for server response handling, corrupting the call stack and crashing the GV-VMS process. The result is immediate loss of all camera feeds, motion detection, alarm handling, and video recording until the service is manually restarted. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, though the Cisco Talos report (TALOS-2026-2411) indicates the vulnerability has been researched to a level sufficient for detailed characterization. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Jun 24, 2026
Stack-based buffer overflow (CWE-121) in the GV-Cloud component of GeoVision GV-VMS V20 20.0.2 enables a remote attacker with a network-intercept position to crash the video management system, causing high-impact denial of service against physical security infrastructure. Exploitation requires impersonating the legitimate GV-Cloud server - achieved via MitM techniques - and delivering a specially crafted network payload that corrupts stack memory in the GV-Cloud client handler. Reported by Cisco Talos (TALOS-2026-2411); no public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and no CISA KEV listing exists.
RemediationAI
Consult the GeoVision security advisory at https://www.geovision.com.tw/cyber_security.php for the specific patched GV-VMS release - no exact fixed version number is independently confirmed in the available intelligence, so the advisory page must be checked directly. Upgrading to the vendor-released patched version is the primary recommended action. As a high-priority compensating control, disable the GV-Cloud feature entirely on any GV-VMS deployment where remote cloud connectivity is not operationally required; this eliminates the attack surface completely at the cost of losing cloud management and remote-viewing capabilities. Where GV-Cloud must remain enabled, implement firewall ACL rules restricting the GV-VMS host's outbound TCP connections to only the documented GeoVision cloud server IP ranges, preventing arbitrary server impersonation via rogue endpoints. Enforcing TLS certificate validation and pinning for cloud server connections - if configurable in GV-VMS - would neutralize the impersonation vector, but configuration availability should be confirmed with the vendor. Segment the GV-VMS host on a dedicated VLAN with strict ingress filtering to reduce MitM exposure.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affects your stack
Find out whether the stacks and servers you run are on an affected version.
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
GeoVision GV-VMS (Video Management System) V20 is a physical-security platform for managing IP cameras, recordings, and alarms; its GV-Cloud feature provides remote cloud connectivity for management, remote viewing, and telemetry. The GV-Cloud client component initiates outbound connections to a cloud endpoint and processes server responses. The root cause is CWE-121 (Stack-based Buffer Overflow): the client fails to enforce appropriate size bounds on incoming server response data, allowing an adversary-controlled response to overwrite adjacent stack frames and corrupt execution state. The affected product is identified by CPE cpe:2.3:a:geovision_inc.:geovision:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*, where the wildcard version field indicates the precise patched boundary is not bounded by the available CPE data alone. Because the vulnerable code path is exercised only when the GV-VMS host connects to a cloud server, the attack surface is limited to the client-to-cloud communication channel.
Know when Geovision gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:H
Server impersonation requires MitM network positioning (AC:H) but no privileges on the target (PR:N); impact is confirmed DoS only, with no confidentiality or integrity effect described.
Primary rating from Vendor (GV).
CVSS VectorVendor: GV
DescriptionCVE.org
A memory corruption vulnerability exists in the GV-Cloud functionality of GeoVision GV-VMS V20 20.0.2.
A specially crafted network request can lead to a denial of service. An attacker can impersonate the legitimate server to trigger this vulnerability.
Threat Intelligence Overview
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
A buffer overflow occurs when a program writes more data to a memory buffer than it was allocated to hold, causing the excess data to spill into adjacent memory regions.
A stack-based buffer overflow occurs when a program writes more data to a buffer located on the stack than it was allocated to hold.
Denial of Service attacks render applications or systems unavailable by overwhelming resources or triggering failure conditions.
Certain EOL GeoVision devices have an OS Command Injection vulnerability. Rated critical severity (CVSS 9.8), this vulne
Certain EOL GeoVision devices fail to properly filter user input for the specific functionality. Rated critical severity
A vulnerability of remote credential disclosure was discovered in Advan VD-1 firmware versions up to 230. Rated critical
A relative path traversal vulnerability found in Advan VD-1 firmware versions up to 230. Rated high severity (CVSS 7.5),
A XSS found in Advan VD-1 firmware versions up to 230. Rated medium severity (CVSS 6.1), this vulnerability is remotely
An issue was discovered in GeoVision GV-Edge Recording Manager 2.2.3.0 for windows, which contains improper permissions
GV Edge Recording Manager (ERM) v2.3.1 improperly executes application components with SYSTEM-level privileges, allowing
In GeoVision GV-ADR2701 cameras, an attacker could edit the login response to access the web application. Rated critical
Buffer overflow exists in Geovision Door Access Control device family, an unauthenticated remote attacker can execute ar
Unauthenticated remote control of GeoVision GV-LPC2211 license-plate-capture cameras (firmware V1.13) is possible becaus
Authenticated ONVIF command injection in GeoVision GV-LPC2211 V1.13 allows a low-privileged network attacker to execute
GeoVision GV-ASmanager's GeoWebServer.exe web service is vulnerable to a stack-based buffer overflow that allows remote,
EUVD-2026-38645
GHSA-7j74-f2vx-3rfg
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
VulDB
Exploit-DB