CVE-2024-48638
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_882_FW130B06 and DIR_878 DIR_878_FW130B08 were discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the SubnetMask parameter in the SetGuestZoneRouterSettings function. This vulnerability allows attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands via a crafted POST request.
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 confidenceThis is an OS command injection vulnerability in D-Link DIR_882 (firmware FW130B06) and DIR_878 (firmware FW130B08) routers. The SubnetMask parameter within the SetGuestZoneRouterSettings function does not properly sanitize user input before passing it to a system call, allowing attackers to inject arbitrary OS commands via a crafted POST request.
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= 1.30b06= 1.30b08CVSS 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 modelCheck the device label or web interface for the exact model number (DIR_882 or DIR_878)Affected if Model is not D-Link DIR_882 or DIR_878, then not affected
-
Check the firmware version on DIR_882Access the router web interface, go to Status or Management page, and record the firmware version. For DIR_882, look for version 1.30b06Affected if Firmware version is exactly 1.30b06 on DIR_882
-
Check the firmware version on DIR_878Access the router web interface, go to Status or Management page, and record the firmware version. For DIR_878, look for version 1.30b08Affected if Firmware version is exactly 1.30b08 on DIR_878
-
Verify Guest Zone router settings feature accessibilityCheck if the Guest Zone or Guest Network settings section is present and accessible in the router web interface under Wireless or Network settingsAffected if The SetGuestZoneRouterSettings function is exposed and the SubnetMask parameter can be modified via POST request
Device is affected if it is a D-Link DIR_882 running firmware 1.30b06 or DIR_878 running firmware 1.30b08, and the Guest Zone router settings feature with the SubnetMask parameter is 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 dataUpdate to a patched firmware version if available from D-Link; otherwise disable the guest zone router settings feature or consider replacing the affected devices, as these are end-of-life consumer routers that may not receive security updates.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,880.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-48638 — 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-2024-48638 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