CVE-2014-9690
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 · uneditedHuawei home gateways WS318 with software V100R001C01B022 and earlier versions are affected by the PIN offline brute force cracking vulnerability of the WPS protocol because the random number generator (RNG) used in the supplier's solution is not random enough. As a result, brute force cracking the PIN code is easier. After an attacker cracks the PIN, the attacker can access the Internet via the cracked device.
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 WS318 gateway uses a weak random number generator in its WPS implementation, making the PIN code predictable and susceptible to offline brute force attacks. An attacker who cracks the WPS PIN gains network access through the compromised gateway.
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<= v100r001c01b022CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 device modelLog into the router web interface or check the device label to confirm the model is Huawei WS318 gatewayAffected if Device is not a Huawei WS318 gateway, this CVE does not apply
-
Check the firmware versionIn the router web interface, navigate to the status or system information page and locate the firmware version fieldAffected if Firmware version is v100r001c01b022 or earlier (the version number contains r001c01b022 or lower)
-
Verify WPS statusIn the router web interface, go to the WPS settings page (often under Wireless or Security settings) and check if WPS is enabledAffected if WPS is enabled and the firmware version is at or below v100r001c01b022
The environment is affected if the device is a Huawei WS318 gateway running firmware version v100r001c01b022 or earlier AND WPS is currently enabled.
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 dataUpdate the gateway firmware to a version beyond V100R001C01B022 that implements a cryptographically secure RNG. If no update is available, disable WPS and use manual PSK configuration instead.
- 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-2014-9690 — 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-2014-9690 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