CVE-2026-12808
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 determined in Edimax BR-6478AC V2 1.23. This impacts the function stainfo of the file /goform/stainfo of the component POST Request Handler. This manipulation of the argument interface causes command injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 confidenceThe Edimax BR-6478AC V2 router firmware 1.23 contains a command injection vulnerability in the /goform/stainfo POST request handler. The 'interface' parameter is passed unsanitized to a system call, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands by injecting shell metacharacters.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 device modelAccess the router admin interface and check the device model information, typically found on the status page or in the system settings. Look for 'BR-6478AC V2' model designation.Affected if The device is not an Edimax BR-6478AC V2 router - different models are not affected by this specific CVE.
-
Check firmware versionIn the router admin panel, navigate to the firmware/version information section, typically under System > Firmware Upgrade or Status > Device Information. Verify the firmware version is exactly 1.23.Affected if The installed firmware version is 1.23 - only this specific version is confirmed vulnerable.
-
Confirm web management interface exposureCheck the router's remote management settings under Advanced > Remote Management or Access Control. Verify whether 'Enable Remote Management' or similar option is turned ON, allowing access to the web interface from outside the local network.Affected if Remote web management is enabled - the vulnerability is exploitable remotely, so external access to the admin interface is required for exploitation.
-
Verify stainfo form handler presenceSend a POST request to http://[router-ip]/goform/stainfo with any payload to confirm the endpoint exists and responds. A vulnerable device will accept the request; a patched or unaffected device may return an error or different response.Affected if The /goform/stainfo endpoint responds to POST requests - this confirms the vulnerable handler is present and accessible.
You are affected if you have an Edimax BR-6478AC V2 router running firmware version 1.23 with remote web management enabled and the stainfo form endpoint 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 dataSince Edimax did not respond to the disclosure and no firmware patch exists, mitigate by disabling remote web management, placing the device behind a NAT/firewall, or replacing the end-of-life device with a supported model.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-12808 — 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-2026-12808 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