CVE-2023-0658
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, which was classified as critical, was found in Multilaser RE057 and RE170 2.1/2.2. This affects an unknown part of the file /param.file.tgz of the component Backup File Handler. The manipulation leads to information disclosure. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The identifier VDB-220053 was assigned to this vulnerability.
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 · moderate confidenceMultilaser RE057 and RE170 routers (firmware 2.1/2.2) expose sensitive information through the backup file handler via /param.file.tgz. An unauthenticated remote attacker can manipulate this backup file to disclose potentially sensitive configuration data, credentials, or other system information stored in the compressed backup.
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= 2.1= 2.2= 2.1= 2.2CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Identify the router modelAccess the router administration interface or check the device label to confirm the model is Multilaser RE057 or RE170Affected if The device is not a RE057 or RE170 model
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the router administration interface or check the firmware version via telnet/SSH if available, and compare to the affected versions 2.1 and 2.2Affected if The firmware version is 2.1 or 2.2
-
Test backup file endpoint accessibilityUsing a web browser or curl command, attempt to access http://<router-ip>/param.file.tgz without providing any authentication credentialsAffected if The endpoint returns a downloadable .tgz file without requiring authentication
-
Inspect the backup file contentsIf the file is accessible, decompress the downloaded param.file.tgz and examine its contents for sensitive configuration data, credentials, or system informationAffected if The backup file contains sensitive data such as passwords, keys, or configuration details that should not be publicly accessible
A user is affected if they have a Multilaser RE057 or RE170 router running firmware version 2.1 or 2.2 and the /param.file.tgz endpoint is accessible without authentication.
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 dataRestrict access to the backup file handler, implement authentication requirements for backup retrieval, and ensure backup files are properly encrypted or access-controlled. Consider disabling unauthenticated backup file downloads.
- Consultation4.0 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 $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-0658 — 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-2023-0658 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