CVE-2021-46108
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 · uneditedD-Link DSL-2730E CT-20131125 devices allow XSS via the username parameter to the password page in the maintenance configuration.
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 a Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in D-Link DSL-2730E CT-20131125 routers. The username parameter on the password configuration page in the maintenance section does not properly sanitize user input, allowing an attacker to inject malicious JavaScript that executes in the context of the user's browser when they access the password page.
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= ct-20131125CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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 modelLog into the router web interface and navigate to the status or device info page, or check the device label for the model number D-Link DSL-2730EAffected if The device is NOT a D-Link DSL-2730E router
-
Verify firmware versionIn the router web interface, go to Device Info or Status page and locate the firmware version field. Compare it against 'ct-20131125'Affected if The firmware version is exactly ct-20131125
-
Confirm maintenance section is accessibleAttempt to access the maintenance or admin section of the router web interface (typically at /maintenance or /admin URL path)Affected if The maintenance section is accessible (with or without authentication)
-
Locate password configuration pageIn the maintenance section, navigate to the password change or password configuration page where the username parameter can be modifiedAffected if The password configuration page exists and accepts a username parameter
A user is affected if they are running D-Link DSL-2730E firmware version ct-20131125 and have access to the maintenance section where the password configuration page with the username parameter is present.
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 dataThe router firmware requires a patch to implement proper input validation and output encoding on the username parameter. Until an official firmware update is available, network segmentation and restricting access to the router's web interface should be considered.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-46108 — 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-2021-46108 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