CVE-2020-25759
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 D-Link DSR-250 3.17 devices. Certain functionality in the Unified Services Router web interface could allow an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands, due to a lack of validation of inputs provided in multipart HTTP POST requests.
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 confidenceD-Link DSR-250 3.17 routers contain an authenticated command injection vulnerability in the web interface. Attackers with valid credentials can inject arbitrary OS commands through unvalidated inputs in multipart HTTP POST requests, achieving remote code execution with the privileges of the web server.
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<= 3.17<= 3.17<= 3.17<= 3.17<= 3.17all versions<= 3.17<= 3.17CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 D-Link DSR device modelLog into the router web interface and navigate to Status > System Information, or check the device label or documentation to confirm the exact model (e.g., DSR-150, DSR-250, DSR-500, etc.)Affected if The device is one of the following models: DSR-150, DSR-150N, DSR-250, DSR-250N, DSR-500, DSR-500N, DSR-500AC, or DSR-1000
-
Check the installed firmware versionIn the router web interface, go to Status > System Information and locate the Firmware Version field. Compare this version number to 3.17, or check if the model is DSR-500N (all versions are affected)Affected if The firmware version is 3.17 or lower, or the device is a DSR-500N at any firmware version
-
Verify the web interface is enabled and accessibleAttempt to access the router's web interface via HTTP or HTTPS on the management port (typically 80 or 443). Confirm the login page loadsAffected if The web interface is reachable and accepts authentication credentials
-
Confirm remote management access is permittedIn the router web interface, go to System > Management > Remote Management, or check Access Control settings to see if remote web management is enabled for WAN/outside interfacesAffected if Remote management access to the web interface is enabled, exposing the device to external attackers
You are affected if you have a D-Link DSR series router (any of the eight models listed) running firmware version 3.17 or lower (or any version for DSR-500N), with the web interface enabled and particularly if remote management is accessible.
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 available vendor firmware updates. If no patch exists, restrict web interface access to trusted networks only, use strong authentication credentials, and consider disabling remote management interfaces.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-25759 — 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-2020-25759 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