CVE-2026-1460
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 post-authentication command injection vulnerability in the “DomainName” parameter of the DHCP configuration file in Zyxel DX3301-T0 and EX3301-T0 firmware versions through 5.50(ABVY.7.1)C0 could allow an authenticated attacker with administrator privileges to execute OS commands on an affected device.
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 post-authentication command injection vulnerability exists in the DomainName parameter of the DHCP configuration in Zyxel DX3301-T0 and EX3301-T0 firmware versions through 5.50(ABVY.7.1)C0. An authenticated attacker with administrator privileges can inject and execute arbitrary OS commands on the affected device through specially crafted input in this DHCP parameter.
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< 1.51\(acrf.0\)v0< 1.60\(acko.3\)v0< 1.60\(acgd.1\)v0< 1.60\(acpz.1\)v0< 1.60\(acgc.2\)v0< 1.18\(acca.7\)v0< 1.15\(acev.4\)v0< 1.16\(accg.1\)v0CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/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 device model and firmware versionAccess the router web interface or CLI and retrieve the device model and exact firmware version from the status or system information pageAffected if Device is Zyxel DX3301-T0 or EX3301-T0 with firmware version 5.50(ABVY.7.1)C0 or lower, OR device is one of the listed Nebula models with firmware below the specified version thresholds
-
Verify administrator access statusCheck if you have valid administrator-level credentials to access the router configuration panelAffected if You possess active administrator credentials for the device
-
Locate DHCP configuration settingsNavigate to the DHCP server configuration section in the router web interface or CLI (typically under Network Settings or LAN configuration)Affected if DHCP configuration interface is accessible and the DomainName parameter can be modified
-
Confirm DomainName parameter presenceIn the DHCP settings, identify the DomainName field where the command injection occursAffected if The DomainName parameter exists in the DHCP configuration and accepts user input
You are affected if your Zyxel device matches one of the listed models AND runs firmware at or below the specified version threshold AND you have administrator access to modify DHCP settings.
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 · scoped1.151.161.18
Apply vendor firmware patch when available; until then, restrict administrative interface access to trusted IPs only, enforce strong admin credentials, and monitor for unauthorized administrative sessions.
Nebula Fwa70: 1.51(acrf.0)v0 | Nebula Fwa505: 1.60(acko.3)v0 | Nebula Fwa510: 1.60(acgd.1)v0 | Nebula Fwa515: 1.60(acpz.1)v0 | Nebula Fwa710: 1.60(acgc.2)v0 | Nebula Lte3301 Plus: 1.18(acca.7)v0 | Nebula Lte7461 M602: 1.15(acev.4)v0 | Nebula Nr5101: 1.16(accg.1)v0
- 1. Identify the specific Nebula device model from the affected list (Fwa70, Fwa505, Fwa510, Fwa515, Fwa710, Lte3301 Plus, Lte7461 M602, Nr5101)
- 2. Access the device's web management interface or Nebula cloud portal
- 3. Navigate to the firmware update or device management section
- 4. Check current firmware version under device settings
- 5. Download the appropriate fixed firmware from Zyxel's official support website (www.zyxel.com)
- 6. Upload and apply the firmware update to the device
- 7. Verify the firmware version after update confirms successful installation
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2026-1460 — 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-2026-1460 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