CVE-2026-10125
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 identified in Edimax BR-6478AC 1.23. Affected by this vulnerability is the function formPPPoESetup of the file /goform/formPPPoESetup of the component POST Request Handler. The manipulation of the argument pppUserName leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.
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 Edimax BR-6478AC v1.23 router's formPPPoESetup function allows remote attackers to overflow the stack via the pppUserName parameter in POST requests to /goform/formPPPoESetup. The vulnerability could allow arbitrary code execution on the affected device.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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.
-
Confirm device model is Edimax BR-6478ACLog into the router web interface or check the device label/marketing materials to verify the exact model number.Affected if Device is not an Edimax BR-6478AC model.
-
Identify installed firmware versionAccess the router administration panel, typically at 192.168.2.1, and navigate to System Status or Firmware Upgrade section to view the current firmware version. Alternatively, check the file named with the firmware update image if manually flashed.Affected if Firmware version is 1.23.
-
Verify PPPoE configuration is accessibleNavigate to the PPPoE settings page in the router web interface, typically under WAN or Internet settings. This is where the vulnerable /goform/formPPPoESetup handler is used.Affected if PPPoE option is present and configurable in the web interface.
-
Check if remote web management is enabledLocate the Remote Management or Web Access settings in the router administration panel (often under Administration or Advanced settings). Determine if remote access via WAN is enabled, which would expose the vulnerable form to external attackers.Affected if Remote management is enabled and the router is directly accessible from the internet.
-
Confirm the vulnerable form endpoint existsAttempt to access the URI /goform/formPPPoESetup directly via HTTP GET request to the router. A response (even an error) indicates the handler exists. This can be done via curl or browser: http://<router-ip>/goform/formPPPoESetupAffected if The endpoint responds, indicating it is present in the firmware.
A user is affected if they own an Edimax BR-6478AC router running firmware version 1.23 with PPPoE configuration accessible and the device is reachable (especially remotely).
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 remote access to the router's web management interface until a vendor patch is available; if the device is end-of-life, replace with a supported model. Implement input length validation on the pppUserName parameter in the web server code.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10125 — 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-2026-10125 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