CVE-2024-6142
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 · uneditedActiontec WCB6200Q uh_tcp_recv_content Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Actiontec WCB6200Q routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the HTTP server. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the HTTP server. Was ZDI-CAN-21410.
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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Actiontec WCB6200Q router's HTTP server component (uh_tcp_recv_content function). The vulnerability stems from insufficient validation of user-supplied data length before copying into a fixed-size buffer, allowing network-adjacent attackers to achieve remote code execution in the context of the HTTP server without authentication.
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= 1.2l.03.5CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Confirm device model is Actiontec WCB6200QInspect the device label on the router physical chassis, or log into the web interface and check the Status or Device Info page for the model number. Alternatively, check via SNMP (snmpwalk on OID 1.3.6.1.2.1.1.2) or by observing the HTTP response headers.Affected if The device model is not WCB6200Q (the vulnerability only affects this specific model).
-
Identify the installed firmware versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to the Status or Administration > Firmware Upgrade page to view the firmware version. Alternatively, access via telnet/SSH if enabled and run 'version' or check /proc/version. Compare the version string exactly to 1.2l.03.5.Affected if The firmware version is exactly 1.2l.03.5 (this is the only affected version per vendor disclosure).
-
Verify HTTP server is enabled and accessibleAttempt to reach the router web interface by browsing to the LAN IP (typically 192.168.0.1 or 192.168.1.1) on ports 80 or 443. Confirm the HTTP service responds. Alternatively, run 'netstat -an' or 'ss -tlnp' on the device to verify ports 80/443 are listening.Affected if The HTTP server is disabled or not responding (the buffer overflow cannot be triggered if the service is not running).
-
Check network exposure of the HTTP interfaceDetermine if the router HTTP interface is accessible from the WAN/internet by checking port forwarding rules, DMZ settings, or attempting an external connection to the router's public IP on ports 80/443. The vulnerability can be exploited by network-adjacent attackers.Affected if The HTTP interface is exposed beyond the local network (this increases attack surface, though LAN-adjacent attackers can also exploit it).
A user is affected if they have an Actiontec WCB6200Q router running firmware version 1.2l.03.5 with the HTTP server enabled and accessible on the network.
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; if no update exists, consider network segmentation to limit exposure and implement Web Application Firewall rules to detect and block malformed HTTP requests targeting the vulnerable endpoint.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-6142 — 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-2024-6142 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