CVE-2025-44023
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 · uneditedAn issue in dlink DNS-320 v.1.00 and DNS-320LW v.1.01.0914.20212 allows an attacker to execute arbitrary via the account_mgr.cgi->cgi_chg_admin_pw components.
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 confidenceDlink DNS-320 and DNS-320LW NAS devices contain a vulnerability in the account_mgr.cgi web component (cgi_chg_admin_pw) that allows arbitrary code execution. The vulnerability is exploitable remotely with network access to the device's web interface.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
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 device's web interface or check the device label/hardware to confirm it is a D-Link DNS-320 or DNS-320LW NAS. Alternatively, use network discovery to identify the device by its MAC address OUI (D-Link) and hostname.Affected if The device is a D-Link DNS-320 or DNS-320LW model.
-
Verify web interface accessibilityDetermine if the device's web management interface (typically on port 80 or 443) is reachable from the network. Use a browser or curl to attempt access to the login page.Affected if The web interface is accessible from untrusted networks, indicating remote exploitation is possible.
-
Check for account_mgr.cgi exposureAttempt to access the account_mgr.cgi endpoint directly (for example, /cgi-bin/account_mgr.cgi) to confirm the component is present and responding.Affected if The account_mgr.cgi endpoint is accessible, suggesting the vulnerable component is exposed.
-
Confirm firmware versionLog into the device web interface and navigate to the system status or firmware information page to identify the installed firmware version. Compare against any available firmware release notes.Affected if The installed firmware is an unpatched version of the DNS-320 or DNS-320LW firmware containing the vulnerability.
You are affected if you have a D-Link DNS-320 or DNS-320LW NAS with its web interface exposed to the network and the account_mgr.cgi component 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 dataRestrict network access to the NAS management interface, ideally placing it behind a firewall or VPN. Since these are older discontinued devices, verify if firmware updates exist; otherwise consider replacement with a supported device.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-44023 — 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-2025-44023 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