Rv016 FirmwareOperating system · Cisco
CVE-2020-3286
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 · uneditedMultiple vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of Cisco Small Business RV320 and RV325 Series Routers and Cisco Small Business RV016, RV042, and RV082 Routers could allow an authenticated, remote attacker with administrative privileges to execute arbitrary code on an affected device. The vulnerabilities are due to insufficient boundary restrictions on user-supplied input to scripts in the web-based management interface. An attacker with administrative privileges that are sufficient to log in to the web-based management interface could exploit each vulnerability by sending crafted requests that contain overly large values to an affected device, causing a stack overflow. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to cause the device to crash or allow the attacker to execute arbitrary code with root privileges on the underlying operating system.
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 confidenceMultiple stack overflow vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of Cisco Small Business RV320/RV325/RV016/RV042/RV082 routers allow authenticated attackers with administrative privileges to send crafted requests containing overly large values, potentially causing device crash or arbitrary code execution with root privileges.
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
Rv016 FirmwareOperating system
<= 4.2.3.10
Rv042 FirmwareOperating system
<= 4.2.3.10
Rv042g FirmwareOperating system
<= 4.2.3.10
Rv082 FirmwareOperating system
<= 4.2.3.10
Rv320 FirmwareOperating system
<= 1.5.1.05
Rv325 FirmwareOperating system
<= 1.5.1.05CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/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 and navigate to Status > System Summary, or check the device label. Common paths: https://<router-ip>/ or http://<router-ip>/ - look for the model number displayed in the management interface.Affected if Model is RV016, RV042, RV042g, RV082, RV320, or RV325.
-
Determine firmware versionIn the router web interface, go to Status > System Summary or Administration > Firmware Upgrade. The firmware version is displayed on the main status page. For CLI access, telnet or SSH to the router and run 'show version' or 'sysinfo' commands.Affected if Firmware version is at or below 4.2.3.10 for RV016/RV042/RV042g/RV082, or at or below 1.5.1.05 for RV320/RV325.
-
Confirm web management interface is enabledIn the router web interface, go to Administration > Management > HTTP/HTTPS Settings, or Administration > Access Settings. Verify that HTTP or HTTPS management access is enabled.Affected if Web-based management interface (HTTP or HTTPS) is enabled on any interface.
-
Check administrative account accessNavigate to Administration > User Management or Administration > Accounts to verify that administrative-level accounts exist and can access the web interface. The vulnerability requires an authenticated attacker with administrative privileges.Affected if Administrative user accounts are configured and accessible via the web interface.
A user is affected if they run an RV016, RV042, RV042g, RV082 (firmware <= 4.2.3.10), RV320, or RV325 (firmware <= 1.5.1.05) with the web-based management interface enabled and have administrative accounts configured.
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 relevant Cisco firmware update for these router models. If no update is available, restrict administrative web interface access to trusted networks or VPN, and consider network segmentation to limit exposure.
Fix this in Rv016 Firmware
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-3286 — 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-2020-3286 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