CVE-2020-10925
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 · uneditedThis vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to compromise the integrity of downloaded information on affected installations of NETGEAR R6700 V1.0.4.84_10.0.58 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the downloading of files via HTTPS. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the certificate presented by the server. An attacker can leverage this in conjunction with other vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-9647.
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 confidenceThis is an SSL/TLS certificate validation bypass vulnerability in NETGEAR R6700 routers (firmware V1.0.4.84_10.0.58). The router's HTTPS file download functionality fails to properly validate SSL certificates, allowing a network-adjacent attacker to perform a man-in-the-middle attack and inject malicious content into downloads. Since no authentication is required, the attack surface is exposed to anyone on the local network.
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= 1.0.4.84_10.0.58CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 router modelAccess the router web interface (typically at 192.168.1.1) and check the device model information, or log into the router and run 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' or check the label on the device itselfAffected if Device is not a Netgear R6700 router
-
Check firmware versionIn the router web interface, go to Administration > Firmware Update or Advanced > Administration > Router Update, and verify the installed firmware version stringAffected if Firmware version is exactly 1.0.4.84_10.0.58
-
Verify HTTPS download feature usageCheck if the router's HTTPS download or remote management feature is configured or active. This may appear as 'HTTPS Download', 'Remote Management', or 'Web Service' settings in the router administration panel under Advanced settingsAffected if HTTPS download or remote access feature is enabled on the affected firmware version
You are affected only if you have a Netgear R6700 router running firmware version 1.0.4.84_10.0.58 AND the HTTPS download feature is being used or accessible on your network.
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 vendor firmware update when available; until then, avoid using the router's HTTPS download feature or isolate the device on a trusted network segment to reduce exposure to adjacent attackers.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $6,720.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-10925 — 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-2020-10925 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