CVE-2025-45984
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 · uneditedBlink routers BL-WR9000 V2.4.9, BL-AC1900 V1.0.2, BL-AC2100_AZ3 V1.0.4, BL-X10_AC8 V1.0.5, BL-LTE300 V1.2.3, BL-F1200_AT1 V1.0.0, BL-X26_AC8 V1.2.8, BLAC450M_AE4 V4.0.0 and BL-X26_DA3 V1.2.7 were discovered to contain a command injection vulnerability via the routepwd parameter in the sub_45B238 function.
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 confidenceA command injection vulnerability exists in multiple Blink router models (BL-WR9000, BL-AC1900, BL-AC2100, etc.) where the routepwd parameter in function sub_45B238 is not properly sanitized before being used in system command execution. An unauthenticated attacker can inject arbitrary OS commands via this parameter, achieving full device compromise with network-level access.
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= 2.4.9= 1.0.2= 1.0.4= 1.0.5= 1.2.3= 1.0.0= 1.2.8= 4.0.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Identify the router modelLocate the model number on the device label or log into the router web interface and check the status or system information page for the exact model designation (e.g., BL-WR9000, BL-AC1900, BL-AC2100, etc.)Affected if The model matches one of the affected models: BL-WR9000, BL-AC1900, BL-AC2100 Az3, BL-X10 AC8, BL-LTE300, BL-F1200 AT1, BL-X26 AC8, or BL-AC450M AE4
-
Determine the installed firmware versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to the System or Status section to view the firmware version. Alternatively, if you have shell access, run 'cat /proc/version' or check /etc/osreleaseAffected if The firmware version matches any of these exact versions: 2.4.9 (BL-WR9000), 1.0.2 (BL-AC1900), 1.0.4 (BL-AC2100), 1.0.5 (BL-X10), 1.2.3 (BL-LTE300), 1.0.0 (BL-F1200), 1.2.8 (BL-X26), or 4.0.0 (BL-AC450M)
-
Verify network accessibility of the web management interfaceAttempt to access the router login page from an untrusted network (e.g., external IP or WAN interface). Check router firewall settings to determine if HTTP/HTTPS ports (80/443) are forwarded or allowed from WANAffected if The router web management interface is accessible from untrusted/network-level attackers (not just from the local LAN)
-
Confirm the vulnerable function is presentIf you have firmware binary access, search for the string 'sub_45B238' or the 'routepwd' parameter within the firmware image. From the web interface, locate any page that references the routepwd parameter or route password functionalityAffected if The firmware binary contains the function sub_45B238 and accepts the routepwd parameter without sanitization
The device is affected if it is a B Link BL-WR9000, BL-AC1900, BL-AC2100, BL-X10, BL-LTE300, BL-F1200, BL-X26, or BL-AC450M router running one of the specific firmware versions listed and its web interface is accessible to untrusted network attackers.
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. As an interim measure, restrict access to the router's web management interface to trusted IP addresses only using firewall rules.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-45984 — 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-2025-45984 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