Ubr920Hardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2001-1210
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedCisco ubr900 series routers that conform to the Data-over-Cable Service Interface Specifications (DOCSIS) standard must ship without SNMP access restrictions, which can allow remote attackers to read and write information to the MIB using arbitrary community strings.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe Cisco ubr900 series cable modem routers conforming to DOCSIS ship with SNMP enabled but without access restrictions. This means the SNMP service accepts any community string (essentially a password) for authentication, allowing remote attackers to read and potentially write to the MIB (Management Information Base) and retrieve sensitive system information or modify device configuration.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Ubr920Hardware / appliance
all versions
Ubr924Hardware / appliance
all versions
Ubr925Hardware / appliance
all versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the device modelUse 'show version' or 'show hardware' command to confirm the router model is a Cisco Ubr920, Ubr924, or Ubr925Affected if The device is a Cisco Ubr920, Ubr924, or Ubr925 cable modem router
-
Verify SNMP is enabledUse 'show snmp' or check the running configuration for 'snmp-server' commands to determine if SNMP is active on the deviceAffected if SNMP is enabled and running on the device
-
Inspect SNMP community string configurationUse 'show snmp community' or review the SNMP configuration to see if community strings are configured with access control lists or if any community string is acceptedAffected if The SNMP service accepts any community string without restriction, or no explicit access control is configured for SNMP community strings
If the device is a Cisco Ubr920, Ubr924, or Ubr925 with SNMP enabled and no restricted community string configuration, the device is affected by this vulnerability.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataRestrict SNMP access by configuring explicit community strings with access control lists, or disable SNMP if not required for operations. If SNMP is needed, implement SNMPv3 with authentication and encryption rather than relying on legacy SNMPv1/v2c community strings.
Fix this in Ubr920
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2001-1210 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2001-1210 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data