dbcve.org
Memory Buffer Bounds ErrorWeakness · CWE-119

CVE-2026-13580

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
94/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable Zero-click 7 weeks old

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 · unedited
A security vulnerability has been detected in Edimax EW-7478APC 1.04. This affects the function formQoS of the file /goform/formQoS of the component POST Request Handler. The manipulation of the argument selSSID leads to buffer overflow. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. 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 confidence

Buffer overflow vulnerability in Edimax EW-7478APC 1.04 router firmware's web interface (POST Request Handler). The formQoS function at /goform/formQoS fails to properly validate the selSSID parameter, allowing remote attackers to overflow a buffer via crafted POST requests. A public exploit exists and the vendor did not respond to early disclosure.

MitigationSince Edimax did not respond and likely no firmware patch exists, mitigate by restricting remote access to the device's web interface (disable WAN management), implement network segmentation to isolate the device, and strongly consider replacing the unsupported device with a actively maintained alternative.

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify device model and firmware version
    Access the router's web interface and check the status/firmware version page, or check the label on the device itself. The firmware version is typically displayed under System Info or Administration > Firmware Upgrade.
    Affected if The device is an Edimax EW-7478APC running firmware version 1.04 exactly, or any version within the 1.x range if the vulnerability was introduced in 1.04 and not fixed in later releases.
  2. Verify web interface is accessible
    Attempt to access the router's web interface via its LAN IP (typically 192.168.1.1 or 192.168.2.1) and confirm it responds. Check if WAN management is enabled by looking for remote access settings in Administration > System > Remote Management.
    Affected if The router's web interface is accessible from the WAN (remote) side, increasing exploitability. Even LAN access provides attack surface.
  3. Confirm QoS feature is enabled
    Log into the web interface and navigate to Advanced Settings > QoS (Quality of Service) or Bandwidth Control. Check if QoS rules or bandwidth limits are configured or enabled.
    Affected if The QoS feature must be enabled and accessible for the vulnerable formQoS function to be reachable. If QoS is disabled, the attack surface is reduced but the vulnerability may still exist in the code.
  4. Verify the vulnerable formQoS endpoint exists
    Attempt a benign POST request to http://[routerIP]/goform/formQoS with a test parameter. Use a tool like curl: curl -X POST http://192.168.1.1/goform/formQoS -d "test=1". A response (even an error) indicates the endpoint exists.
    Affected if The /goform/formQoS endpoint responds to POST requests, confirming the vulnerable function is present in the firmware.
  5. Check for signs of exploitation
    Review router logs under Administration > Log or System Logs for unusual POST requests to /goform/formQoS, especially with unusually long selSSID parameter values. Monitor network traffic for such requests.
    Affected if Logs show POST requests to /goform/formQoS with abnormally long selSSID values or the router exhibits unexpected behavior (crashes, admin password changed, new port forwards).

You are affected if you have an Edimax EW-7478APC router with firmware 1.04 (or unpatched 1.x versions) with the web interface enabled and the QoS feature accessible, as the vulnerable formQoS function at /goform/formQoS can be exploited via a crafted POST request with an overflowing selSSID parameter.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Since Edimax did not respond and likely no firmware patch exists, mitigate by restricting remote access to the device's web interface (disable WAN management), implement network segmentation to isolate the device, and strongly consider replacing the unsupported device with a actively maintained alternative.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation12.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA3.0 h
27.0 hours of engineering $4,800
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,680.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-13580 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-13580 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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