CVE-2013-7308
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 OSPF implementation on the D-Link DES-3810-28 switch with firmware R2.20.B017 does not consider the possibility of duplicate Link State ID values in Link State Advertisement (LSA) packets before performing operations on the LSA database, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (routing disruption) or obtain sensitive packet information via a crafted LSA packet, a related issue to CVE-2013-0149.
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 D-Link DES-3810-28 switch with firmware R2.20.B017 has a flaw in its OSPF routing implementation where it does not validate for duplicate Link State ID values in incoming Link State Advertisement (LSA) packets before processing them in the LSA database. This allows remote attackers to send crafted LSA packets with duplicate Link State IDs to cause routing disruption (denial of service) or potentially extract sensitive routing information from the database.
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= r2.20.b017all 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:A/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 device modelAccess the switch CLI or web interface and verify the exact model number is D-Link DES-3810-28. Use 'show switch' or check the device status page.Affected if The device is not a D-Link DES-3810-28 switch
-
Check firmware versionRun 'show firmware information' or 'show version' in the switch CLI to retrieve the installed firmware version.Affected if Firmware version is R2.20.B017 or any other version (all versions are affected)
-
Verify OSPF is enabledRun 'show ip ospf' or 'show running-config | include ospf' to check if OSPF routing protocol is configured and active.Affected if OSPF is enabled and the switch is participating in OSPF routing
-
Check OSPF adjacency statusRun 'show ip ospf neighbor' to see if the switch has established OSPF adjacencies with neighboring routers.Affected if The switch has active OSPF neighbors and is receiving LSA packets
The environment is affected if it is a D-Link DES-3810-28 switch with OSPF enabled, regardless of firmware version, as the vulnerability lies in the OSPF LSA processing logic.
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 any available firmware update from D-Link for the DES-3810-28 switch that addresses OSPF input validation. If no patch is available, consider network segmentation to limit OSPF adjacency exposure to trusted segments, or implement LSA filtering at upstream routers.
- 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-2013-7308 — 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-2013-7308 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