CVE-2026-15428
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 · uneditedAn OS command injection vulnerability exists in Archer VX800v v1 due to insufficient input sanitization of the domain name parameter. An adjacent attacker who can access the relevant HTTP interface can modify the parameter to inject shell metacharacters, resulting in arbitrary code execution with root privileges. Successful exploitation may allow remote code execution and complete compromise of the 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 · moderate confidenceOS command injection vulnerability in the Archer VX800v v1 router's HTTP interface where the domain name parameter lacks proper input sanitization. An adjacent attacker with HTTP interface access can inject shell metacharacters into the domain name field, causing arbitrary command execution with root privileges.
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< 0.16.0= 2.0.0CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 device modelCheck the router label or web interface for the exact model number 'Archer VX800v' and confirm it is version v1Affected if Device is not an Archer VX800v v1 router
-
Check firmware versionAccess the router's web interface (usually at 192.168.0.1) and navigate to Status or System > Firmware Upgrade to view the installed firmware versionAffected if Firmware version cannot be verified or differs from vendor's latest published version
-
Verify HTTP management interface is enabledLog into the router web interface and check under Advanced > Network > Internet or System > Management for 'HTTP' or 'Web Management' access settingsAffected if HTTP management interface is enabled and accessible from the network
-
Confirm remote management accessCheck if remote management/remote access is enabled in the router settings (often under Advanced > Network > Remote Management or similar)Affected if Remote management is enabled allowing access beyond the local network
-
Inspect for signs of compromiseReview router system logs (usually under System > Logs or Status > Logs) for unexpected commands, shell invocations, or suspicious entries involving the domain name or DNS settingsAffected if Logs contain unfamiliar commands, shell metacharacters, or evidence of unauthorized configuration changes
The environment is affected if the device is an Archer VX800v v1 with HTTP management interface enabled and the installed firmware is an unpatched version
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 data0.16.0
Restrict access to the device's HTTP management interface via network segmentation or firewall rules; contact TP-Link for firmware patch; disable remote management if not required.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 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 $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-15428 — 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-2026-15428 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