CVE-2012-1922
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 · uneditedMultiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Sitecom WLM-2501 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that modify settings for (1) Mac Filtering via admin/formFilter, (2) IP/Port Filtering via formFilter, (3) Port Forwarding via formPortFw, (4) Wireless Access Control via admin/formWlAc, (5) Wi-Fi Protected Setup via formWsc, (6) URL Blocking Filter via formURL, (7) Domain Blocking Filter via formDOMAINBLK, and (8) IP Address ACL Filter via admin/formACL in goform/, different vectors than CVE-2012-1921.
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 confidenceMultiple CSRF vulnerabilities in Sitecom WLM-2501 router allow remote attackers to silently submit admin form requests (Mac Filtering, IP/Port Filtering, Port Forwarding, WPS, URL/Domain Blocking, ACL) by tricking authenticated administrators into visiting malicious pages. The router lacks anti-CSRF tokens or referer validation on eight different form endpoints in the goform/ directory.
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 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 router modelLog into the router's web administration interface and check the status or firmware page for the exact model number. Alternatively, check the device label on the router hardware itself.Affected if The model is Sitecom WLM-2501
-
Confirm the web interface is accessibleAttempt to access the router's default management IP (commonly 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1) in a web browser. Verify you can reach the login page.Affected if The router's administrative web interface is reachable on the network
-
Verify goform endpoints existAfter authentication, check for the presence of form handlers in the /goform/ directory by examining page source code or attempting to access known endpoints such as /goform/formMacFilter or /goform/formWps. These endpoints handle Mac Filtering, IP/Port Filtering, Port Forwarding, WPS, URL Blocking, and ACL settings.Affected if The router uses goform/ directory endpoints without anti-CSRF tokens for the listed features
-
Check for CSRF protection mechanismsInspect the HTML source of an admin page containing forms (e.g., Mac Filtering or Port Forwarding). Look for hidden input fields containing tokens, unique session identifiers, or referer validation logic in the form markup.Affected if No anti-CSRF tokens, unique session identifiers, or referer validation are present in the form code
You are affected if you have a Sitecom WLM-2501 router with its web interface accessible and the goform/ endpoints lack CSRF protection tokens in their form submissions.
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 an end-of-life legacy device likely lacking vendor patches, remediation requires either replacing the router with a currently-supported model or implementing compensating controls such as admin access exclusively over VPN/IPsec, network segmentation isolating the management interface, and browser-based CSRF protection extensions.
- 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-2012-1922 — 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-2012-1922 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