CVE-2018-10578
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 WatchGuard AP100, AP102, and AP200 devices with firmware before 1.2.9.15, and AP300 devices with firmware before 2.0.0.10. Incorrect validation of the "old password" field in the change password form allows an attacker to bypass validation of this field.
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 validation bypass exists in the password change form on affected WatchGuard access points (AP100, AP102, AP200, AP300). The 'old password' field is not properly validated, allowing an attacker to change any user's password without knowing the current password, effectively enabling full account takeover.
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< 1.2.9.15< 1.2.9.15< 1.2.9.15< 2.0.0.10CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 the WatchGuard AP modelAccess the AP web administration interface and look for the device model displayed on the dashboard or status page. Alternatively, log in via SSH and run 'show system' or 'get system info' to identify the model (AP100, AP102, AP200, or AP300).Affected if The device is an AP100, AP102, AP200, or AP300 model.
-
Check the firmware version via web interfaceLog into the AP web administration panel and navigate to the Status or System Information page. The firmware version is typically displayed there. Note the exact version number.Affected if The displayed firmware version cannot be read or is inaccessible.
-
Check the firmware version via CLILog into the AP via SSH or console and execute 'show version' or 'get firmware version' to retrieve the exact firmware build number.Affected if The version command fails or returns an unrecognized format.
-
Compare version against vulnerability rangesCompare the identified firmware version to the affected ranges: AP100/AP102/AP200 are vulnerable if below 1.2.9.15; AP300 is vulnerable if below 2.0.0.10. Ensure you compare the full version string including any build numbers.Affected if The firmware version is below 1.2.9.15 on AP100/AP102/AP200, or below 2.0.0.10 on AP300.
-
Verify password change form accessibilityNavigate to the password change or user management section of the web interface. Confirm the 'old password' field is present in the password change form.Affected if The password change form with an 'old password' field is accessible (this confirms the attack surface exists, though version check is the definitive indicator).
If the device is an AP100, AP102, AP200, or AP300 running firmware version below 1.2.9.15 (for the first three models) or below 2.0.0.10 (for AP300), the environment is affected by this validation bypass.
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.
dbcve · scoped1.2.9.152.0.0.10
Upgrade firmware to version 1.2.9.15 or later for AP100/AP102/AP200, and 2.0.0.10 or later for AP300 devices.
AP100/AP102/AP200: Firmware 1.2.9.15 | AP300: Firmware 2.0.0.10
- 1. Identify the specific WatchGuard AP model (AP100, AP102, AP200, or AP300) in your environment
- 2. Download the appropriate fixed firmware version: AP100/AP102/AP200 to version 1.2.9.15, or AP300 to version 2.0.0.10 from the official WatchGuard support portal
- 3. Access the device management interface via web UI or CLI
- 4. Navigate to the firmware update section and upload the downloaded firmware file
- 5. Apply the firmware upgrade and allow the device to reboot
- 6. After reboot, verify the firmware version matches the expected fixed version
- 7. Confirm the device is functioning normally and the web management interface is accessible
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-10578 — 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-2018-10578 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