CVE-2017-18789
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 · uneditedCertain NETGEAR devices are affected by disclosure of sensitive information. This affects R6250 before V1.0.4.8, R6400 before V1.0.1.22, R6400v2 before V1.0.2.32, R7100LG before V1.0.0.32, R7300 before V1.0.0.52, R8300 before V1.0.2.94, R8500 before V1.0.2.100, D6220 before V1.0.0.28, D6400 before V1.0.0.60, and D8500 before V1.0.3.29.
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 · moderate confidenceInformation disclosure vulnerability in NETGEAR router firmware allows unauthenticated attackers to access sensitive information. Multiple router models (R6250, R6400, R6400v2, R7100LG, R7300, R8300, R8500, D6220, D6400, D8500) are affected in versions prior to the specified security patches.
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< 1.0.4.8< 1.0.1.22< 1.0.2.32< 1.0.0.32< 1.0.0.52< 1.0.2.94< 1.0.2.100< 1.0.0.28< 1.0.0.60CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 router modelLocate the model number on the router device label or log into the router admin web interface and check the status or device info pageAffected if router model is R6250, R6400, R6400v2, R7100LG, R7300, R8300, R8500, D6220, D6400, or D8500
-
Locate firmware versionIn the router admin interface, navigate to Settings, Advanced, or Administration section to find the current firmware version displayedAffected if firmware version cannot be determined or is not displayed
-
Compare R6250 versionIf router is R6250, compare installed version against 1.0.4.8Affected if installed version is lower than 1.0.4.8
-
Compare R6400 versionIf router is R6400, compare installed version against 1.0.1.22 (first variant) or 1.0.2.32 (second variant)Affected if installed version is lower than 1.0.1.22 or between 1.0.1.22 and 1.0.2.32 (for second variant)
-
Compare other model versionsMatch router model to its threshold: R7100LG < 1.0.0.32, R7300 < 1.0.0.52, R8300 < 1.0.2.94, R8500 < 1.0.2.100, D6220 < 1.0.0.28, D6400 < 1.0.0.60Affected if installed version is below the threshold for that specific model
Router is affected if it is one of the listed models and the firmware version is below the specified patch version for that model.
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 data1.0.0.281.0.0.321.0.0.52
Update router firmware to the versions specified in the advisory (R6250: V1.0.4.8, R6400: V1.0.1.22, R6400v2: V1.0.2.32, R7100LG: V1.0.0.32, R7300: V1.0.0.52, R8300: V1.0.2.94, R8500: V1.0.2.100, D6220: V1.0.0.28, D6400: V1.0.0.60, D8500: V1.0.3.29).
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-18789 — 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-2017-18789 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