CVE-2024-10282
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 classified as critical was found in Tenda RX9 and RX9 Pro 22.03.02.10/22.03.02.20. Affected by this vulnerability is the function sub_42EA38 of the file /goform/SetVirtualServerCfg. The manipulation of the argument list leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in Tenda RX9/RX9 Pro routers (firmware 22.03.02.10/22.03.02.20) in the SetVirtualServerCfg function via the 'list' parameter, allowing remote code execution.
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= 22.03.02.10= 22.03.02.20CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 router modelCheck the device label or web interface to confirm the model is Tenda RX9 or RX9 ProAffected if Model is not Tenda RX9 or RX9 Pro - likely not affected
-
Check firmware versionLog into the router web interface (typically at 192.168.0.1) and navigate to System Settings > Firmware Upgrade or Administration > Device Info to view the installed firmware versionAffected if Firmware version is 22.03.02.10 or 22.03.02.20 - vulnerable
-
Verify virtual server feature is configuredNavigate to the router web interface under Advanced Settings > Virtual Server or Port Forwarding to check if any port forwarding rules are configured using the 'list' parameter functionalityAffected if No virtual server rules exist - vulnerability not exploitable in current configuration
-
Confirm remote administration accessCheck if remote management is enabled in the router under Advanced Settings > Remote Management or similar, which would allow external access to the vulnerable functionAffected if Remote administration is disabled and device is not accessible from WAN - exploitation unlikely
Affected if the router is a Tenda RX9 or RX9 Pro running firmware version 22.03.02.10 or 22.03.02.20 with the virtual server feature configured and remote administration accessible.
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 dataApply vendor firmware patch when available; until then, disable remote administration interfaces or restrict access to trusted IPs to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,152.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-10282 — 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-2024-10282 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