Wrt160nHardware / appliance · Cisco
CVE-2009-2073
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 Linksys WRT160N wireless router hardware 1 and firmware 1.02.2 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of other users for unspecified requests via unknown vectors, as demonstrated using administrator privileges and actions.
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 Linksys WRT160N router firmware 1.02.2 allows remote attackers to trick authenticated users into unknowingly executing administrative actions by leveraging the lack of proper CSRF token validation or referer checking in the router's web management interface.
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
Wrt160nHardware / appliance
= 1.02.2CVSS 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.
-
Confirm router model is WRT160NAccess the router's web interface or check the device label/marketing to identify the exact model numberAffected if The device is not a Cisco/Linksys WRT160N router, this CVE does not apply
-
Check firmware version is 1.0.2.2Log into the router's web management interface and navigate to the Status or Administration page to view the firmware versionAffected if The installed firmware version is not 1.02.2 (exact match required)
-
Verify web management interface is enabledAttempt to access the router's web interface over HTTP/HTTPS (typically at the router's LAN IP such as 192.168.1.1)Affected if The web management interface is disabled or inaccessible, the CSRF attack surface does not exist
-
Confirm CSRF protections are absentInspect HTTP responses from the router's admin pages for the presence of anti-CSRF tokens or check if the application validates the Referer header on POST requestsAffected if No CSRF tokens are present in forms and the router does not validate the Referer header on administrative actions
You are affected if you have a Cisco WRT160N router running firmware version 1.02.2 with its web management interface accessible and lacking CSRF token validation.
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 dataSince this is a legacy router from 2009 with firmware 1.02.2, users should upgrade to a supported router model if available, or implement network segmentation to limit exposure to the router's administrative interface. If vendor firmware updates exist, apply them immediately.
Fix this in Wrt160n
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-2073 — 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-2009-2073 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