CVE-2024-46582
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 · uneditedDraytek Vigor 3910 v4.3.2.6 was discovered to contain a buffer overflow in the sSrvAddr parameter at v2x00.cgi. This vulnerability allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via a crafted input.
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 confidenceDraytek Vigor 3910 v4.3.2.6 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in the sSrvAddr parameter of the v2x00.cgi web interface. Attackers can send specially crafted input to trigger the overflow, causing a Denial of Service condition.
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= 4.3.2.6CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 device modelAccess the router's web interface or check the device label/console to confirm it is a Draytek Vigor 3910Affected if The device is not a Draytek Vigor 3910, then this CVE does not apply
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to System Maintenance > Firmware Upgrade, or use the command line to retrieve the firmware version (e.g., 'sys info' or similar). Compare the installed version against 4.3.2.6Affected if The installed firmware version is exactly 4.3.2.6, indicating they are running the affected version
-
Verify web interface accessibilityConfirm that the v2x00.cgi web interface is reachable. This is typically at https://[router-ip]/cgi/v2x00.cgi. Check if the management web interface is exposed to untrusted networksAffected if The web interface is accessible and the device runs firmware 4.3.2.6, the device is vulnerable to the buffer overflow via the sSrvAddr parameter
If the device is a Draytek Vigor 3910 running firmware version 4.3.2.6 and has its web interface accessible, the environment is affected by this CVE.
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 updates when available. Until then, restrict access to the device's web management interface to trusted networks or IP addresses to reduce attack surface.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-46582 — 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-2024-46582 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