CVE-2008-1529
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 Prestige routers have a minimum password length for the admin account that is too small, which makes it easier for remote attackers to guess passwords via brute force methods.
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 confidenceZyXEL Prestige routers contain a default or configurable minimum password length for the admin account that is insufficient, allowing remote attackers to more easily brute force credentials due to the reduced search space of possible passwords.
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= h-d1= h-d3= hw-d1= 3.40CVSS 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
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/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 router model and firmware versionAccess the router web interface or check the label/sticker on the device. Look for the model number (Prestige 660, 661) and firmware version (h-d1, h-d3, hw-d1, or Zynos 3.40).Affected if The router is a Zyxel Prestige 660, 661, or device running Zynos firmware matching the exact versions listed.
-
Check if remote web management is enabledLog into the router admin interface and navigate to the remote management or WAN access settings. Look for options like 'Enable Web Server' or 'Remote Management' that allow HTTP/HTTPS access from the WAN side.Affected if Remote administration over WAN is enabled, making the admin interface accessible to external attackers.
-
Locate the minimum password length configurationIn the router web interface, go to the administrator or user account settings. Look for a field labeled 'Minimum Password Length', 'Password Policy', or similar. Note the configured minimum character count.Affected if The minimum password length is set to a low value (typically 1-6 characters), creating a reduced search space for brute force attacks.
-
Verify the current admin password lengthReview or audit the current admin account password. If possible, check the password strength indicator or manually count characters in the configured password.Affected if The admin password is shorter than 12 characters, making it vulnerable to brute force attacks given the weak minimum length setting.
You are affected if your Zyxel Prestige router model and firmware version match the affected versions AND remote WAN management is enabled with a weak minimum password length setting.
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 dataChange the admin account password to a strong, long password (12+ characters minimum) and ensure the router firmware is updated to the latest version to enforce adequate password length policies.
- 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-2008-1529 — 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-2008-1529 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