CVE-2023-44419
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 DIR-X3260 Prog.cgi Stack-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of D-Link DIR-X3260 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the prog.cgi binary, which handles HNAP requests made to the lighttpd webserver. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length an user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length stack-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-20774.
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 confidenceA stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the prog.cgi binary on D-Link DIR-X3260 routers. The binary processes HNAP requests via the lighttpd webserver and fails to validate the length of user-supplied data before copying it to a fixed-length stack buffer. An unauthenticated, network-adjacent attacker can exploit this to execute arbitrary code 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< 1.04b01CVSS 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.
-
Confirm device model is D-Link DIR-X3260Access the router web interface or check the device label/metadata. Look for 'DIR-X3260' in the model identifier.Affected if The device is not a D-Link DIR-X3260, then it is not affected by this specific CVE.
-
Check installed firmware versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to Status or Management page to view the firmware version. Alternatively, make an HTTP request to the router and inspect the server header or HNAP response for version information.Affected if Firmware version is present and is lower than 1.04b01 (e.g., 1.03, 1.04, etc.), then the device is potentially affected.
-
Verify HNAP endpoint is accessibleSend an HTTP POST request to /HNAP1/ or check if the router responds to HNAP SOAPAction headers. This endpoint is typically exposed on the default HTTP port (80) of the router.Affected if The router responds to HNAP requests, indicating HNAP functionality is enabled and the attack surface is present.
-
Confirm prog.cgi is present and reachableSend an HTTP request to /prog.cgi or similar paths used by the lighttpd webserver. Check for a valid response or 404 error.Affected if The prog.cgi binary exists and is accessible via the web interface, enabling the vulnerable code path.
If the device is a D-Link DIR-X3260 running firmware below 1.04b01 with HNAP and prog.cgi accessible, the environment is affected by CVE-2023-44419.
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.
dbcve · scoped1.04b01
Apply available firmware updates from D-Link. If no patch exists, consider disabling HNAP functionality or restricting network access to the router's management interface.
D-Link DIR-X3260 Firmware version 1.04b01 or later
- 1. Visit the official D-Link support website (support.dlink.com) and navigate to the DIR-X3260 product support page.
- 2. Locate and download the latest firmware version for the DIR-X3260 router.
- 3. Access the router's web administration interface by navigating to the device's IP address (typically 192.168.0.1).
- 4. Navigate to the Firmware Upgrade or Administration section of the router settings.
- 5. Upload the downloaded firmware file and allow the upgrade process to complete.
- 6. After the router reboots, verify the firmware version in the administration interface to confirm the upgrade was successful.
- 7. Consider resetting the router to factory defaults and reconfiguring after major firmware upgrades as a security best practice.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-44419 — 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-2023-44419 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