CVE-2025-5622
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was found in D-Link DIR-816 1.10CNB05 and classified as critical. Affected by this issue is the function wirelessApcli_5g of the file /goform/wirelessApcli_5g. The manipulation of the argument apcli_mode_5g/apcli_enc_5g/apcli_default_key_5g leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in the D-Link DIR-816 router's wirelessApcli_5g web form handler allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted HTTP requests manipulating apcli_mode_5g, apcli_enc_5g, or apcli_default_key_5g parameters. The vulnerable function processes user input without proper bounds checking, overwriting stack memory.
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= 1.10cnb05CVSS 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 device modelCheck the device label on the router or log into the web interface and look for the model name on the status or administration pageAffected if Device is not a D-Link DIR-816 router
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the router web interface, navigate to Status or Administration > Firmware/Upgrade page to view the current firmware version. Alternatively, access via CLI if telnet/ssh is enabled and run 'cat /proc/version' or check /etc/versionAffected if Firmware version is 1.10cnb05
-
Determine if the web management interface is exposedCheck router WAN IP accessibility by attempting to access http://[WAN-IP] from an external network, or review port forwarding/firewall rules on upstream devices. Use 'nmap [WAN-IP] -p 80,443' or similar to check if HTTP/HTTPS ports are open to the internetAffected if The router's web interface (port 80/443) is accessible from the WAN/internet side
-
Check if 5G wireless client mode is configuredLog into the web interface and navigate to Wireless Settings > Advanced or Wireless > AP Client mode. Look for settings involving apcli_mode_5g, apcli_enc_5g, or apcli_default_key_5g. The vulnerability triggers when these 5G AP client parameters are present in the web formAffected if 5G wireless AP client mode is enabled or configurable in the wireless settings
You are affected if you have a D-Link DIR-816 router running firmware 1.10cnb05 with its web interface accessible and the 5G wireless AP client feature is present in the web form.
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.
dbcve · scopedSince this is an end-of-life device with no vendor patch available, replace the affected D-Link DIR-816 with a currently-supported router. If immediate replacement is not feasible, isolate the device on a restricted network segment and disable remote management interfaces to reduce attack surface.
- 1. This vulnerability affects D-Link DIR-816 firmware version 1.10CNB05, which is explicitly stated as a product no longer supported by the maintainer.
- 2. As the product is end-of-life, no official security patches or firmware updates are available from D-Link.
- 3. Implement network segmentation to isolate the affected device on a restricted VLAN separate from critical business systems.
- 4. If possible, replace the end-of-life D-Link DIR-816 with a currently supported router from a vendor that provides regular security updates.
- 5. If the device must remain in service, disable the wirelessApcli_5g functionality if not required, and monitor network traffic for indicators of exploitation attempts.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,456.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-5622 — 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-2025-5622 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