CVE-2026-1668
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 · uneditedThe web interface on multiple Omada switches does not adequately validate certain external inputs, which may lead to out-of-bound memory access when processing crafted requests. Under specific conditions, this flaw may result in unintended command execution.<br>An unauthenticated attacker with network access to the affected interface may cause memory corruption, service instability, or information disclosure. Successful exploitation may allow remote code execution or denial-of-service.
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 critical input validation vulnerability exists in the web interface of multiple TP-Link Omada switches. The flaw allows unauthenticated attackers to send specially crafted HTTP requests containing malformed external input, triggering out-of-bounds memory access. Successful exploitation can lead to memory corruption enabling remote code execution or denial-of-service conditions.
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>= 1.0.0, < 1.0.19>= 4.20.0, < 4.20.17>= 4.30.0, < 4.30.1>= 3.20.0, < 3.20.17>= 3.30.0, < 3.30.1>= 1.20.0, < 1.20.17>= 1.30.0, < 1.30.1>= 4.20.0, < 4.20.18>= 5.0.0, < 5.0.15>= 5.20.0, < 5.20.1>= 5.20.0, < 5.20.18>= 5.30.0, < 5.30.1>= 1.0.0, < 1.0.19>= 1.20.0, < 1.20.17>= 1.30.0, < 1.30.1CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 your Omada switch modelAccess the device management interface or check the physical device label to determine the exact model (e.g., SG2005P, SG2008, SG2008P, SG2016P, SG2210MP, SG2210P, SG2210xMP M2, or SG2218)Affected if The model matches one of the affected products listed in the CVE (SG2005P Pd, SG2008, SG2008P, SG2016P, SG2210MP, SG2210P, SG2210xMP M2, or SG2218)
-
Determine the installed firmware versionLog into the Omada web interface and navigate to System > Firmware Upgrade, or use the Omada Controller software to check the device firmware version. The version is typically displayed in the device status or system information pageAffected if The installed firmware version falls within any of the affected ranges: SG2005P Pd: < 1.0.19; SG2008: < 4.20.17 or < 4.30.1; SG2008P: < 3.20.17 or < 3.30.1; SG2016P: < 1.20.17 or < 1.30.1; SG2210MP: < 4.20.18, < 5.0.15, or < 5.20.1; SG2210P: < 5.20.18 or < 5.30.1; SG2210xMP M2: < 1.0.19; SG2218: < 1
-
Verify the web interface is enabled and accessibleConfirm that the HTTP/HTTPS web management interface is enabled on the device. Check via System > Management > HTTP/HTTPS settings in the web interface or via the Omada Controller under Device Settings > ServicesAffected if The web interface is enabled and reachable from network segments accessible to untrusted users (the vulnerability is exploitable by unauthenticated attackers via the web interface)
You are affected if your device model is an Omada switch listed in the CVE, your installed firmware version is lower than the fixed version for your model, and the web management interface is accessible to potential attackers.
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 · scoped1.0.191.20.171.30.1
Apply vendor firmware updates for affected Omada switch models immediately. If patches are unavailable, restrict network access to the management web interface using firewall rules or VLAN isolation to prevent unauthenticated attackers from reaching the service.
Firmware version equal to or greater than the upper bound of each affected version range (e.g., 1.0.19, 4.20.17, 4.30.1, 3.20.17, 3.30.1, 1.20.17, 1.30.1, 4.20.18, 5.0.15, 5.20.1, 5.20.18, 5.30.1, 1.0.19)
- 1. Identify the specific Omada switch model from the affected product list (Sg2005p Pd, Sg2008, Sg2008p, Sg2016p, Sg2210mp, Sg2210p, Sg2210xmp M2, or Sg2218).
- 2. Determine the current firmware version installed on the affected device via the web interface or CLI.
- 3. Download the corresponding fixed firmware version from the official TP-Link/Omada support portal at support.omadanetworks.com.
- 4. For Sg2005p Pd: upgrade to firmware version 1.0.19 or later.
- 5. For Sg2008: upgrade to firmware version 4.20.17 or later (for 4.20.x branch) OR version 4.30.1 or later (for 4.30.x branch).
- 6. For Sg2008p: upgrade to firmware version 3.20.17 or later (for 3.20.x branch) OR version 3.30.1 or later (for 3.30.x branch).
- 7. For Sg2016p: upgrade to firmware version 1.20.17 or later (for 1.20.x branch) OR version 1.30.1 or later (for 1.30.x branch).
- 8. For Sg2210mp: upgrade to firmware version 4.20.18 or later (for 4.20.x branch), 5.0.15 or later (for 5.0.x branch), OR 5.20.1 or later (for 5.20.x branch).
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-1668 — 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-2026-1668 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