CVE-2005-3724
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 · uneditedZyxel P2000W Version 1 VOIP WIFI Phone Wj.00.10 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information and possibly cause a denial of service via a direct connection to UDP port 9090, which is undocumented and does not require authentication.
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 · moderate confidenceThe Zyxel P2000W Version 1 VOIP WiFi phone ships with an undocumented UDP service listening on port 9090 that requires no authentication, allowing remote attackers to potentially retrieve sensitive information or cause denial of service via direct connection.
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= wj.00.10= wj.00.10CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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.
-
Confirm device model is affectedAccess the device's web admin interface (typically at 192.168.x.1) or check the device label/menu for the exact model number. Look for 'Zyxel P2000W Version 1' or 'Zyxel Prestige 2000w V.1' product identifiers.Affected if Device model exactly matches Zyxel P2000W Version 1 or Zyxel Prestige 2000w V.1
-
Check firmware versionNavigate to the device's status or firmware information page within the admin interface. Identify the firmware version string displayed.Affected if Firmware version is wj.00.10
-
Scan for open UDP port 9090From a workstation on the same network segment, run a UDP port scan against the device's IP address targeting port 9090. Example: nmap -sU -p 9090 <device_ip> or use a simple netcat/UDP probe tool.Affected if UDP port 9090 is open and responds to probes (device sends any response packet)
-
Test undocumented service accessibilitySend a UDP packet to port 9090 and observe if the device returns any response without requiring authentication credentials. Document any sensitive information or system details returned.Affected if Device responds on UDP 9090 without any authentication and reveals system information or accepts commands
User is affected if they own a Zyxel P2000W Version 1 or Prestige 2000w V.1 device with firmware wj.00.10 that has an accessible UDP service on port 9090.
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 the device is still in use, implement network-level controls to block UDP port 9090 from untrusted networks; if available, apply any vendor firmware updates; otherwise consider replacing the deprecated device.
- 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-2005-3724 — 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-2005-3724 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