CVE-2007-2649
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 · uneditedDeutsche Telekom (T-com) Speedport W 700v uses JavaScript delays for invalid authentication attempts to the CGI script, which allows remote attackers to bypass the delays and conduct brute-force attacks via direct calls to the authentication CGI script.
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 Speedport W 700v router implements client-side JavaScript delays to throttle brute-force authentication attempts, but this protection can be bypassed by making direct HTTP requests to the authentication CGI script, bypassing the JavaScript layer entirely.
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
- Complete
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:N/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 router modelCheck the device label, web interface, or documentation to confirm the exact model is T Com Speedport W 700vAffected if The router is a Speedport W 700v model (all versions are affected)
-
Verify remote management is accessibleAttempt to access the router's web interface remotely or check if HTTP port 80/443 is open on the WAN interfaceAffected if The router's web authentication interface is reachable from an untrusted network
-
Confirm client-side rate limiting is in useAccess the login page and examine the HTML/JavaScript for authentication delay functions or throttling codeAffected if The login form uses JavaScript setTimeout or similar to impose delays rather than server-side rate limiting
-
Test direct HTTP authentication bypassSend a direct HTTP POST request to the CGI authentication endpoint (such as /cgi/login or /cgi/auth) without waiting for JavaScript delays, using a tool like curlAffected if Direct HTTP requests to the CGI script are accepted and processed without the JavaScript-enforced delay
-
Check for server-side rate limitingExamine server responses or router logs for evidence of server-side throttling after multiple failed attemptsAffected if There is no server-side enforcement of authentication attempt limits, only client-side JavaScript delays
A user is affected if they operate a Speedport W 700v router with its web management interface exposed and the authentication relies solely on client-side JavaScript delays that can be bypassed via direct HTTP requests to the CGI script.
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 dataReplace the end-of-life router with a current model that implements server-side rate limiting, or disable remote management interfaces and restrict access to trusted networks only.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-2649 — 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-2007-2649 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