CVE-2017-17065
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered on D-Link DIR-605L Model B before FW2.11betaB06_hbrf devices, related to the code that handles the authentication values for HNAP. An attacker can cause a denial of service (device crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact by sending a sufficiently long string in the password field of the HTTP Basic Authentication section of the HTTP request.
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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the HNAP authentication handling code of D-Link DIR-605L routers before firmware version FW2.11betaB06_hbrf. By sending an excessively long string in the password field of HTTP Basic Authentication, an attacker can trigger the overflow, causing device denial of service (crash) or potentially achieving arbitrary code execution.
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< fw2.11betab06_hbrfCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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 device modelAccess the router web interface or check the device label to confirm the model is D-Link DIR-605LAffected if Device is not a D-Link DIR-605L, then not affected by this specific CVE
-
Check installed firmware versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to Status or System section to view the firmware version. Alternatively, check via CLI if available.Affected if Firmware version is lower than FW2.11betaB06_hbrf (e.g., FW2.10, FW2.09, etc.)
-
Verify HNAP service statusCheck if HNAP (Home Network Administration Protocol) is enabled on the device by examining the router web interface under LAN settings or administration. Can also probe for HNAP by sending an HTTP request to /HNAP1/Affected if HNAP service is enabled and accessible on the device
-
Assess network exposureDetermine if the router admin interface (port 80/443) is reachable from untrusted networks. Use network scanning tools or check firewall rules.Affected if Router admin interface is exposed to untrusted networks without proper access controls
A user is affected if they have a D-Link DIR-605L router running firmware version lower than FW2.11betaB06_hbrf with HNAP service enabled and the device is network-accessible.
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 the vendor firmware update (FW2.11betaB06_hbrf or later). If no update is available, consider network segmentation, disabling HNAP service if possible, or replacing the end-of-life device.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,864.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-17065 — 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-2017-17065 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