basicsecurity.net
Proof, not just disclosure.
Threats / LG / CVE-2018-14839
CVE-2018-14839 · EUVD no mirror located · GCVE no mirror located Verified 2026-06-22

LG N1A1 NAS vulnerability

LG N1A1 NAS devices are vulnerable to remote code execution via OS command injection, allowing unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary commands with system privileges.

Verdict

Today item — known-exploited.

An OS command injection flaw in LG N1A1 NAS enables remote code execution without authentication. The vulnerability has been actively exploited in the wild and carries high exploitation likelihood.

CISA KEV Yes · 2022-03-253EPSS 0.89354 (verify live)4
01

Is it exploitable?

— the evidence, ranked above the score
Reported exploitation
643 independent public reports of in-the-wild exploitation are cataloged.Distinct reporting sources (vendor, incident response, government); open them for the underlying claims.
Exploited in the wild
Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2022-03-25).
CISA KEV ↗Confirmed
Probability (EPSS)
EPSS 0.89354 — modeled likelihood of exploitation activity.EPSS is a daily-changing model output — open the source for today's value.
Severity / affected
Affected: LG, N1A1 NAS. Confirm exact fixed builds in the vendor advisory.
NVD ↗Reported
Weakness (CWE)
Mapped to CWE-78 OS Command Injection — weakness family: Injection.CWE assignment from the public NVD record; the weakness class drives how the flaw is exploited.
NVD ↗Reported
02

Who’s exploiting it?

— attribution turns risk into urgency
Attribution not established

No confirmed (advisory-backed) threat-actor attribution is established for this record. Absence of a named actor is not absence of compromise — see Coverage & confidence.

03

Why it matters

— the attack path, told twice: adversary, then board
1

Front door — unauthenticated access narrative 1

Attacker
I identify the NAS device on the network and probe for exposed management interfaces or API endpoints.
Business
Unpatched NAS devices remain discoverable and accessible to threat actors scanning for vulnerable appliances.
2

Keys to the kingdom — privilege/identity takeover narrative 2

Attacker
I craft a malicious request containing shell metacharacters to inject OS commands through an input parameter.
Business
Lack of input validation allows attackers to bypass application logic and execute system-level operations.
3

Lateral reach — past segmentation narrative 3

Attacker
I execute commands with the privileges of the NAS service process to establish persistence or exfiltrate stored data.
Business
Compromised NAS devices become pivot points for lateral movement and repositories of sensitive organizational files are exposed.
04

What to do

— defensible action
  • Remediate per the vendor advisory — confirm the fixed build for your version and verify exposure.1
Say it to the boardA vulnerability with this evidence profile is a defensible budget line, not a backlog ticket — fund the change against the proof above.
05

Coverage & confidence

— what we know, and what we don’t

Established (cited)

  • KEV listing (CISA)
  • EPSS probability (FIRST)
  • 643 reported-exploitation source(s)
  • CWE weakness mapping (NVD)
  • Catalogued by mitre (CNA)
  • Coverage gaps — stated, not hidden

  • No EUVD / GCVE mirror in feed — single-authority dependency for the identifier.
  • EPSS & exposure are time-varying; verify live at the source.
  • Threat-actor attribution not established from feed data — absence of a name is not absence of compromise.
  • No finder/reporter credit recorded in the public CVE entry — the work behind this find is unattributed.
  • Disclosure & credit2
    Catalogued by mitreCNA
    Credited with finding itNo finder named in the public CVE record — the work behind this find is unattributed.