CVE-2011-4503
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 · uneditedThe UPnP IGD implementation in Broadcom Linux on the Sitecom WL-111 allows remote attackers to establish arbitrary port mappings by sending a UPnP AddPortMapping action in a SOAP request to the WAN interface, related to an "external forwarding" vulnerability.
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 Sitecom WL-111 router with Broadcom Linux contains a vulnerable UPnP IGD (Internet Gateway Device) implementation that allows remote attackers on the WAN side to send SOAP requests with AddPortMapping actions to create arbitrary port mappings. This enables external attackers to forward traffic from external ports to internal network hosts, effectively bypassing the device's firewall protections.
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 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/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 router modelCheck the device label or web interface for the exact model number. Look for 'Sitecom WL-111' or any Broadcom Linux-based router.Affected if The device is a Sitecom WL-111 or a Broadcom Linux-based router with the vulnerable UPnP IGD implementation.
-
Access the router web interfaceLog into the router admin panel (typically at 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1) and navigate to the UPnP settings section, usually found under 'Advanced' or 'NAT' settings.Affected if UPnP is enabled in the router configuration.
-
Verify UPnP service is listening on WANFrom an external network, attempt to reach the UPnP IGD service on the router's WAN IP using port 1900 (SSDP) or the configured SOAP port. Use a tool like nmap: nmap -p 1900 <WAN_IP>Affected if The UPnP service is exposed and reachable from the WAN side (internet-facing).
-
Test AddPortMapping SOAP actionSend a crafted SOAP request to the UPnP IGD service on the WAN interface. Example using curl: curl -X POST '<WAN_IP>:1900/upnp/control/WANIPConnection' -H 'SOAPACTION: "urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#AddPortMapping"' -d '<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><s:Envelope xmlns:s="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" s:encodingStyle="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/encoding/"><s:Body><u:AddPortMapping xmlns:u="urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1"><NewRemoteHost></NewRemoteHost><NewExternalPort>12345</NewExternalPort><NewProtocol>TCP</NewProtocol><NewInternalPort>Affected if The SOAP request succeeds and creates a port mapping without authentication, confirming the vulnerability.
-
Check existing port mappings from WANQuery the UPnP IGD GetGenericPortMappingEntry or GetExternalIP action from the WAN side to enumerate existing mappings: curl -X POST '<WAN_IP>:1900/upnp/control/WANIPConnection' -H 'SOAPACTION: "urn:schemas-upnp-org:service:WANIPConnection:1#GetExternalIP"'Affected if The router accepts and responds to these requests from the WAN, indicating UPnP is accessible externally.
A user is affected if they own a Sitecom WL-111 or Broadcom Linux-based router with UPnP enabled and the UPnP IGD service is exposed to or reachable from their WAN interface.
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 dataDisable UPnP functionality on the affected router; if the device is end-of-life and cannot receive firmware updates, replace it with a currently-supported router that receives security patches.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-4503 — 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-2011-4503 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