CVE-2004-2455
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 · uneditedSweex Wireless Broadband Router/Accesspoint 802.11g (LC000060) allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information and gain privileges by using TFTP to download the nvram file, then extracting the username, password, and other data from the file.
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 Sweex Wireless Broadband Router LC000060 exposes its NVRAM configuration file via an unauthenticated TFTP server. Attackers can remotely download this file using TFTP and extract plaintext usernames, passwords, and other sensitive configuration data, enabling full device compromise.
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= lc000060CVSS 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
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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 Sweex LC000060 device on networkCheck network devices/inventory for Sweex Wireless Broadband Router model LC000060, or check DHCP leases/logs for device hostname or MAC vendor identificationAffected if A Sweex Wireless Broadband Router LC000060 is present on the network
-
Verify TFTP service is accessibleScan the router IP for open UDP port 69 (TFTP) using nmap -sU -p 69 <router_ip> or netcat -u -p 69 <router_ip>Affected if UDP port 69 responds to TFTP requests indicating the service is running and exposed
-
Attempt unauthenticated TFTP configuration downloadUse tftp client to connect: tftp <router_ip>, get the NVRAM config file (common paths: nvram.cfg, config.bin, or try getting a blank filename)Affected if TFTP connection succeeds without authentication and returns configuration file data containing plaintext credentials or sensitive settings
A user is affected if they operate a Sweex LC000060 router with TFTP port 69 exposed, allowing unauthenticated download of the device configuration file.
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 dataIf available, apply vendor firmware updates that restrict TFTP access or add authentication. Otherwise, block inbound TFTP traffic (UDP port 69) at network boundaries and consider replacing the legacy device.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2004-2455 — 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-2004-2455 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