CVE-2007-4389
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in /xslt in 2wire 1701HG, 1800HW, and 2071 Gateway routers, with 3.17.5, 3.7.1, and 5.29.51 software, allows remote attackers to create DNS mappings as administrators, and conduct DNS poisoning attacks, via the NAME and ADDR parameters.
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 confidenceCSRF vulnerability in 2wire router web interface (/xslt) allows remote attackers to trick authenticated administrators into creating arbitrary DNS mappings via crafted requests, enabling DNS poisoning attacks. The vulnerability stems from lack of anti-CSRF tokens or referer validation in the router's DNS configuration functions.
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= 3.7.1= 3.17.5= 5.29.51= 3.7.1= 3.17.5= 5.29.51= 3.7.1= 3.17.5= 5.29.51CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:C
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 on the router or log into the web interface to confirm the model number is 2wire 1701hg, 1800hw, or 2071Affected if The device is a 2wire 1701hg, 1800hw, or 2071 router
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the router web interface and navigate to the system status or maintenance page to view the firmware version; alternatively, inspect the HTTP response headers or check via telnet if availableAffected if The firmware version matches 3.7.1, 3.17.5, or 5.29.51
-
Verify the web interface is accessibleAttempt to access the router web interface over HTTP on the local network (typically http://192.168.1.254 or similar)Affected if The router web interface is reachable and requires authentication
-
Check for the DNS configuration endpointNavigate to or inspect requests going to the /xslt endpoint in the router web interface, typically found in DNS or network settingsAffected if The /xslt endpoint is present and accessible for DNS configuration
-
Inspect for anti-CSRF protectionsExamine the HTML forms at the DNS configuration page; view the page source to check if hidden CSRF tokens or referer validation are present in the form submissionsAffected if The DNS configuration forms lack hidden CSRF token fields and do not validate the referer header
A user is affected if they are running a 2wire 1701hg, 1800hw, or 2071 router with firmware version 3.7.1, 3.17.5, or 5.29.51 and the router web interface with the /xslt DNS configuration endpoint is accessible without proper CSRF protections.
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 dataApply vendor firmware updates if available; if devices are end-of-life, replace with supported hardware or implement network segmentation to isolate affected routers from untrusted networks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,152.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-4389 — 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-2007-4389 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