CVE-2008-5382
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 I-O DATA DEVICE HDL-F160, HDL-F250, HDL-F300, and HDL-F320 firmware before 1.02 allows remote attackers to (1) change a configuration or (2) delete files as an authenticated user via unknown vectors. NOTE: the provenance of this information is unknown; the details are obtained solely from third party information.
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 confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in I-O DATA HDL-F series NAS firmware before version 1.02 allows remote attackers to inject malicious requests through an authenticated user's session, enabling unauthorized configuration changes or file deletion. The attack vector is not fully disclosed but involves tricking authenticated users into visiting attacker-controlled pages.
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 versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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.
-
Identify the HDL-F series modelLocate the device label or access the NAS web administration interface to confirm the exact model number (HDL-F160, HDL-F250, HDL-F300, or HDL-F320)Affected if the device is any of these four models
-
Access the firmware version informationLog into the NAS web management console and navigate to the System Settings or Firmware Information section to view the currently installed firmware versionAffected if the firmware version cannot be determined or is not 1.02 or later
-
Compare installed firmware to patched versionNote the displayed firmware version number and compare it against the fixed version 1.02Affected if the installed firmware version is below 1.02 (for example, 1.00, 1.01, or any other version earlier than 1.02)
-
Confirm web interface accessibilityVerify that the NAS web administration interface is reachable over the network (typically on ports 80 or 443)Affected if the web interface is accessible to network users and the firmware version is below 1.02
The environment is affected if the device is an I-O DATA HDL-F160, HDL-F250, HDL-F300, or HDL-F320 running firmware versions earlier than 1.02, with the web management interface exposed.
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 dataUpgrade affected HDL-F160, HDL-F250, HDL-F300, and HDL-F320 devices to firmware version 1.02 or later. If upgrading is not feasible, implement anti-CSRF tokens on application forms and validate HTTP Referer headers to mitigate cross-site request forgery.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-5382 — 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-2008-5382 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