CVE-2013-2645
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 on the TP-LINK WR1043N router with firmware TL-WR1043ND_V1_120405 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) enable FTP access (aka "FTP directory traversal") to /tmp via the shareEntire parameter to userRpm/NasFtpCfgRpm.htm, (2) change the FTP administrative password via the nas_admin_pwd parameter to userRpm/NasUserAdvRpm.htm, (3) enable FTP on the WAN interface via the internetA parameter to userRpm/NasFtpCfgRpm.htm, (4) launch the FTP service via the startFtp parameter to userRpm/NasFtpCfgRpm.htm, or (5) enable or disable bandwidth limits via the QoSCtrl parameter to userRpm/QoSCfgRpm.htm.
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 TP-LINK WR1043N router firmware allow remote attackers to hijack administrator authentication by tricking logged-in admins into visiting malicious pages. Attackers can enable FTP access with directory traversal to /tmp, change FTP admin passwords, expose FTP on WAN interface, launch FTP services, or modify bandwidth QoS settings by crafting malicious requests to specific endpoints (userRpm/NasFtpCfgRpm.htm, userRpm/NasUserAdvRpm.htm, userRpm/QoSCfgRpm.htm).
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= tl-wr1043nd_v1_120405CVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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 admin web interface (typically 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1) and navigate to System Tools > Firmware Upgrade or Status page to view the hardware version and firmware build date. Alternatively, check the device label on the router itself.Affected if The router is a TP-LINK WR1043N and the firmware version displays as tl-wr1043nd_v1_120405 (exact version match).
-
Verify admin web interface is accessibleAttempt to reach the router's web admin page via HTTP on the typical LAN IP addresses (192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1). Check if the login page (userRpm/LoginRpm.htm) loads successfully.Affected if The admin interface is reachable, meaning an attacker could potentially trick a logged-in administrator into visiting malicious pages.
-
Check for vulnerable endpoint accessibilityAttempt to access the specific vulnerable pages via the router's web interface: userRpm/NasFtpCfgRpm.htm, userRpm/NasUserAdvRpm.htm, userRpm/QoSCfgRpm.htm. These pages relate to NAS/FTP configuration and QoS settings.Affected if Any of these pages return a valid response (rather than a 404 or access denied), indicating the NAS/FTP features are present in the firmware.
-
Confirm FTP/NAS service availabilityCheck if the router has NAS or FTP functionality enabled by accessing the web interface and looking for NAS, FTP Server, or Storage settings under the main navigation menu.Affected if FTP or NAS features are present and configurable on the router, which is the attack surface for this CSRF vulnerability.
You are affected if you are using a TP-LINK WR1043N router with firmware version tl-wr1043nd_v1_120405 and the router's admin web interface is accessible, as the CSRF flaw allows attackers with a logged-in administrator session to modify FTP and QoS settings.
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 dataApply vendor firmware update if available; until then, avoid browsing untrusted sites while logged into router admin panel and enable any available CSRF protections in the firmware.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-2645 — 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-2013-2645 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