CVE-2023-44427
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 SMTPServerAddress 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-21222.
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 where the SetSysEmailSettings function in prog.cgi fails to validate the SMTPServerAddress parameter before passing it to a system call. An attacker with authentication (which can be bypassed) can inject arbitrary shell commands that execute with root privileges on the affected device.
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 firmware versionAccess the router's web interface and navigate to the Status or Management page to view the firmware version, or use the command line (e.g., `cat /proc/version` or `nvram get firmware_version` if available via telnet/SSH)Affected if The firmware version is lower than 1.04b01 (e.g., 1.04, 1.03, etc.)
-
Verify the email notification feature configurationCheck if the email notification or alert settings are configured in the router's web interface under System or Maintenance settings, as this invokes the SetSysEmailSettings functionAffected if Email notification is enabled and configured with a custom SMTP server address in the SMTPServerAddress field
-
Confirm network accessibility of the web interfaceDetermine if the router's HTTP/HTTPS ports (80/443) are exposed to the internet or an untrusted network by checking port forwarding rules or performing an external port scanAffected if The router's web management interface is accessible from outside the local network without VPN or firewall protection
-
Inspect web server logs for suspicious prog.cgi requestsIf accessible, review router logs or network traffic for POST requests to prog.cgi containing unusual patterns in the SMTPServerAddress parameter (e.g., semicolons, pipes, backticks)Affected if Log entries show prog.cgi being called with command injection payloads in the SMTPServerAddress parameter
-
Check for unexpected administrative accountsReview the router's user management or admin account settings for any unauthorized or unknown accounts that may indicate prior exploitationAffected if New or unexpected administrator accounts exist on the device
The device is affected if it runs D-Link DIR-X3260 firmware version lower than 1.04b01 and has the web interface accessible (even with bypassed authentication), as the vulnerable SetSysEmailSettings function can be exploited via the SMTPServerAddress parameter.
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. Until then, restrict network access to the router's web interface (ports 80/443), disable remote management if possible, and monitor for unauthorized access.
1.04b01
- Upgrade D-Link DIR-X3260 router firmware to version 1.04b01 or later
- After upgrading, verify the firmware version in the router's web administration interface under 'Status' or 'Firmware Upgrade' section
- Restrict network access to the router's web interface (ports 80/443) to trusted devices only, as a defense-in-depth measure
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 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 $7,680.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-44427 — 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-2023-44427 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