Rv325 Dual Wan Gigabit Vpn Router FirmwareOperating system · Cisco
CVE-2019-1724
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 · uneditedA vulnerability in the session management functionality of the web-based interface for Cisco Small Business RV320 and RV325 Dual Gigabit WAN VPN Routers could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to hijack a valid user session on an affected system. An attacker could use this impersonated session to create a new user account or otherwise control the device with the privileges of the hijacked session. The vulnerability is due to a lack of proper session management controls. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted HTTP request to a targeted device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to take control of an existing user session on the device. Exploitation of the vulnerability requires that an authorized user session is active and that the attacker can craft an HTTP request to impersonate that session.
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 Cisco RV320 and RV325 routers contain a session management flaw where the web interface lacks proper session token validation, allowing an unauthenticated attacker to craft HTTP requests that impersonate an active legitimate user session and gain administrative control of the device.
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
Rv325 Dual Wan Gigabit Vpn Router FirmwareOperating system
= 1.3.1.12
Rv320 Dual Gigabit Wan Vpn Router SoftwareOperating system
= 1.3.1.12CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 router modelAccess the device web interface or check the physical device label to confirm it is a Cisco RV320 Dual Gigabit WAN VPN Router or Cisco RV325 Dual WAN Gigabit VPN RouterAffected if The device is NOT a Cisco RV320 or RV325 model - if so, you are not affected by this specific CVE
-
Check the firmware or software versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to Status > System Summary (or similar) to view the firmware version; alternatively, check the admin page for the exact version numberAffected if The installed version is exactly 1.3.1.12 - this is the only affected version for this CVE
-
Verify web management interface accessibilityDetermine if the router web management interface (typically HTTP/HTTPS on ports 80 or 443) is reachable from network segments outside your trusted internal networkAffected if The web interface is exposed to untrusted networks - the vulnerability requires the web interface to be accessible for exploitation
-
Inspect active administrative sessionsCheck the router admin panel for active sessions or logged-in administrative users; review any session management or user activity logs if availableAffected if Multiple concurrent admin sessions exist or sessions from unexpected IP addresses are observed - this may indicate exploitation attempts
You are affected only if you have a Cisco RV320 or RV325 router running exactly firmware version 1.3.1.12 with the web management interface accessible to potential attackers.
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 Cisco firmware update when available; in the interim, restrict management interface access to trusted networks/VPN, enforce short session timeouts, and monitor for unauthorized administrative actions.
Fix this in Rv325 Dual Wan Gigabit Vpn Router Firmware
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-1724 — 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-2019-1724 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