CVE-2018-16192
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 · uneditedAterm WF1200CR and Aterm WG1200CR (Aterm WF1200CR firmware Ver1.1.1 and earlier, Aterm WG1200CR firmware Ver1.0.1 and earlier) allow an attacker on the same network segment to obtain information registered on the device via unspecified vectors.
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 confidenceThis is an information disclosure vulnerability in NEC's Aterm WF1200CR and WG1200CR routers. An attacker on the same network segment can obtain information registered on the device through unspecified vectors. The CVSS 6.5 indicates a network-based attack with low complexity, no authentication required, and moderate confidentiality impact.
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<= 1.1.1<= 1.0.1CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/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.
-
Confirm router model is affectedLocate the model number on the device label or access the router admin interface to verify the exact model designation (WF1200CR or WG1200CR)Affected if Model is WF1200CR or WG1200CR
-
Identify firmware versionAccess the router web-based administration panel (typically at 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1) and navigate to the Status or System Information page to view the installed firmware versionAffected if Firmware version cannot be determined or is not visible in the admin interface
-
Compare WF1200CR version against affected rangeIf model is WF1200CR, compare installed firmware version to the affected range: any version <= 1.1.1Affected if Installed firmware version is 1.1.1 or lower on WF1200CR
-
Compare WG1200CR version against affected rangeIf model is WG1200CR, compare installed firmware version to the affected range: any version <= 1.0.1Affected if Installed firmware version is 1.0.1 or lower on WG1200CR
The device is affected if it is an NEC Aterm WF1200CR running firmware 1.1.1 or earlier, or a WG1200CR running firmware 1.0.1 or earlier.
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 router firmware to patched versions (WF1200CR Ver1.1.2 or later, WG1200CR Ver1.0.2 or later). If patches unavailable, restrict network access to the device by isolating it in a limited network segment.
- 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-2018-16192 — 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-2018-16192 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