CVE-2005-2374
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 · uneditedBelkin 54g wireless routers do not properly set an administrative password, which allows remote attackers to gain access via the (1) Telnet or (2) web administration interfaces.
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 confidenceBelkin 54g wireless routers fail to properly initialize/set an administrative password during setup, leaving the device accessible without authentication via Telnet or the web management interface. This allows remote unauthenticated attackers to gain full administrative control of the router.
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 dataall 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
- 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.
-
Verify web interface access controlAttempt to access the router's web management interface at http://[router-ip>/ by opening it in a browser or using curl/wget. Observe whether the page loads directly without presenting a login prompt or authentication challenge.Affected if The web interface loads and displays admin settings without requiring any username or password entry.
-
Verify Telnet access controlAttempt to connect to the router via Telnet on port 23 using a command such as 'telnet [router-ip>' or nc -t [router-ip> 23. Observe whether the connection succeeds without prompting for credentials.Affected if Telnet connects to the router and provides shell or admin menu access without requesting any authentication.
-
Check for empty admin passwordIf web or Telnet access is available, examine the admin configuration page or interface to determine whether the administrative account has a password set. Look for password fields or status indicators.Affected if The administrative account shows no password configured, a blank password field, or indicates the password is empty/default.
If the router permits full administrative access via its web interface or Telnet without requiring any password authentication, the device is affected by CVE-2005-2374.
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 dataImmediately change the default administrative password to a strong, unique credential on affected routers via the local web interface, and disable remote administration (Telnet/HTTP) if external access is not required.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-2374 — 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-2005-2374 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