CVE-2024-41590
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 · uneditedSeveral CGI endpoints are vulnerable to buffer overflows, by authenticated users, because of missing bounds checking on parameters passed through POST requests to the strcpy function on DrayTek Vigor310 devices through 4.3.2.6.
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 confidenceMultiple CGI endpoints on DrayTek Vigor310 devices (versions up to 4.3.2.6) contain buffer overflow vulnerabilities exploitable by authenticated users via POST requests. The root cause is the use of unbounded strcpy() function without proper bounds checking on user-supplied parameters passed to these endpoints.
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< 4.4.5.3< 4.4.5.3< 4.4.5.3< 4.2.7< 4.3.6.1< 4.3.2.8>= 4.4.0.0, < 4.4.3.1< 4.2.7< 4.3.2.8>= 4.4.0.0, < 4.4.3.1CVSS 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 DrayTek device modelLog into the router web interface and look at the device status page, or use the diagnostic interface to query the device model informationAffected if The device is not a DrayTek Vigor series device (the vulnerability only affects DrayTek devices)
-
Check firmware version against affected rangesIn the router web interface, go to System Maintenance > Firmware Upgrade or Device Info to view the installed firmware version numberAffected if The firmware version matches one of the vulnerable ranges: Vigor2765, Vigor2763, Vigor2135 < 4.4.5.3; Vigor166, Vigor165 < 4.2.7; Vigor3912 < 4.3.6.1; Vigor3910, Vigor1000b < 4.3.2.8 OR >= 4.4.0.0 and < 4.4.3.1
-
Verify web management interface is enabledIn the router web interface, go to System Maintenance > Management or Access Control to check if the HTTP/HTTPS web management interface is turned onAffected if The web management interface is enabled and accessible, as the buffer overflow is triggered via POST requests to CGI endpoints
-
Check remote management exposureExamine the router's access control settings to determine if web management is exposed to the internet or untrusted LAN segments rather than only localhost or trusted IP rangesAffected if The web management interface is reachable from untrusted networks (WAN or non-trusted LAN IPs), which would allow authenticated attackers to exploit the vulnerability
The environment is affected if the device is a DrayTek Vigor model listed in the CVE with a firmware version in the vulnerable range and the web management interface is enabled and accessible to the attacker.
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 · scoped4.2.74.3.2.84.3.6.1
Replace DrayTek Vigor310 with a currently supported device model, as the Vigor310 is an older end-of-life product with no further firmware updates. If immediate replacement is not feasible, restrict web management interface access to trusted IP addresses only and monitor for indicators of compromise.
Model-specific: Vigor2765/2763/2135 to 4.4.5.3+; Vigor166/165 to 4.2.7+; Vigor3912 to 4.3.6.1+; Vigor1000b/3910 to 4.4.3.1+ (or 4.3.2.8 for 4.3.x branch)
- 1. Identify the exact DrayTek Vigor model number from the affected device.
- 2. Determine the current firmware version installed on the device (typically available in the web administration interface under System Maintenance > Firmware Upgrade).
- 3. Download the appropriate firmware version from the official DrayTek support website: for Vigor2765, Vigor2763, and Vigor2135 upgrade to version 4.4.5.3 or later; for Vigor166 and Vigor165 upgrade to version 4.2.7 or later; for Vigor3912 upgrade to version 4.3.6.1 or later; for Vigor1000b upgrade to version 4.4.3.1 or later (or version 4.3.2.8 if staying in the 4.3.x branch); for Vigor3910 upgra
- 4. Upload the new firmware file through the device's web interface or using the Firmware Upgrade utility.
- 5. After upgrade, verify the new firmware version is installed and confirm the device is functioning normally.
- 6. As this vulnerability requires authenticated access, ensure strong administrator passwords are in place and consider restricting web administration access to trusted IP addresses if the device's configuration allows.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-41590 — 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-2024-41590 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