CVE-2013-5754
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 authorization implementation on Dahua DVR appliances accepts a hash string representing the current date for the role of a master password, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain administrative access and change the administrator password via requests involving (1) ActiveX, (2) a standalone client, or (3) unspecified other vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2013-3612.
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 confidenceDahua DVR appliances contain a hardcoded authentication backdoor where the authorization mechanism accepts a hash string derived from the current date as a valid master password. Attackers can compute the date-based hash and bypass authentication to gain administrative access and modify the administrator password through ActiveX, standalone client, or other interfaces.
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 versionsall 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
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/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 the DVR device modelCheck the device label, web interface system information, or login page for the exact model name (e.g., Dvr0404hd A, Dvr0404hf S E). Access the device web interface by browsing to its IP address and look for model information in the system info or device status page.Affected if The device model matches any of the following: Dvr0404hd A, Dvr0404hd L, Dvr0404hd S, Dvr0404hd U, Dvr0404hf A E, Dvr0404hf Al E, Dvr0404hf S E, or Dvr0404hf U E.
-
Confirm all firmware versions are affectedSince the CVE states all versions of the affected models are vulnerable, check the current firmware version in the device web interface under System Info, Device Info, or similar. Compare against the CVE statement that no fixed version is provided.Affected if The device model is any of the affected models regardless of firmware version.
-
Determine network exposure of the DVRCheck if the device is directly accessible from untrusted networks by reviewing firewall rules, router configurations, or network scans. Look for open ports commonly used by DVRs such as HTTP (80), RTSP (554), or the Dahua-specific port (37777). Use a port scanner or check network device configurations.Affected if The device has open management ports (80, 554, 37777, etc.) accessible from networks outside the trusted internal network, or from the internet.
-
Verify web interface authentication behaviorAccess the device login page via HTTP/HTTPS and observe the authentication mechanism. The backdoor allows bypass using a date-derived hash as the password. Note: Do not attempt exploitation. Merely confirm the login interface is reachable and accepts credentials.Affected if The web login interface is reachable and the device accepts administrative credentials without additional network-level controls like VPN or IP whitelisting.
The environment is affected if any DVR device matches the specific model numbers (Dvr0404hd A/L/S/U or Dvr0404hf A E/Al E/S E/U E) and is network-accessible, since all versions of these models contain the date-based hash backdoor.
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 dataIsolate affected DVR devices behind network firewalls with restricted access, monitor for unauthorized configuration changes, and apply vendor firmware patches when available. If no patch exists, consider replacing the devices.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $10,240.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-5754 — 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-2013-5754 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