CVE-2023-44424
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 SetSysEmailSettings EmailTo Command Injection Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of D-Link DIR-X3260 routers. Although authentication is required to exploit this vulnerability, the existing authentication mechanism can be bypassed. The specific flaw exists within prog.cgi, which handles HNAP requests made to the lighttpd webserver listening on TCP ports 80 and 443. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of a user-supplied string before using it to execute a system call. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-21158.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in D-Link DIR-X3260 routers allows authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary code as root via the SetSysEmailSettings function in prog.cgi. The EmailTo parameter is not validated before being passed to a system call, enabling shell command injection. Although authentication is required, it can be bypassed.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 router modelLocate the device label on the router or access the web management interface and check the model number displayed in the header or status pageAffected if The device is not a D-Link DIR-X3260, then it is not affected by this specific CVE
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the router web interface (typically at 192.168.0.1), navigate to the System or Status section, and locate the firmware version field. Compare against 1.04b01Affected if The installed firmware version is less than 1.04b01, meaning the device is within the affected version range
-
Verify prog.cgi is accessibleAttempt to access the URI /prog.cgi on the router's web interface (e.g., http://192.168.0.1/prog.cgi) using a browser or curl commandAffected if The endpoint responds (returns any HTTP status other than 404), indicating the CGI interface is available for testing
-
Check if remote web management is enabledIn the router web interface, go to the Advanced or Management settings and look for Remote Management, Web Access, or Administration options to see if external access on ports 80/443 is permittedAffected if Remote management is enabled and ports 80/443 are exposed to untrusted networks, increasing exposure to this vulnerability even though authentication is required
The device is affected if it is a D-Link DIR-X3260 router running firmware version below 1.04b01 and the prog.cgi endpoint is accessible, regardless of whether remote management is enabled (since the authentication bypass makes local network attacks feasible).
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 vendor firmware updates when available; if no patch exists, disable remote web management or block ports 80/443 from untrusted networks to reduce attack surface.
D-Link DIR-X3260 Firmware version 1.04b01 or later
- 1. Download the firmware version 1.04b01 or later from the official D-Link support website for the DIR-X3260 router.
- 2. Access the router's web administration interface using a browser.
- 3. Navigate to the firmware upgrade section (typically under Administration or System Settings).
- 4. Upload the downloaded firmware file and initiate the upgrade process.
- 5. Wait for the upgrade to complete and the router to reboot automatically.
- 6. Verify the firmware version in the router's admin interface to confirm the upgrade was successful.
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-2023-44424 — 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-2023-44424 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