CVE-2026-1685
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 identified in D-Link DIR-823X 250416. This vulnerability affects the function sub_40AC74 of the component Login. Such manipulation leads to improper restriction of excessive authentication attempts. The attack may be performed from remote. This attack is characterized by high complexity. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.
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 confidenceThe D-Link DIR-823X router firmware has a vulnerability in the Login component where authentication attempts are not properly restricted, allowing unlimited brute-force login attempts without any lockout, account temporarily disabling, or progressive delay mechanisms.
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= 250416CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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.
-
Confirm device model is D-Link DIR-823XAccess the router web interface or check the device label/menu for the exact model numberAffected if Device model is DIR-823X
-
Check installed firmware versionLog into the router admin panel and navigate to Status or System settings to view the firmware version, or use telnet/SSH if enabled to run 'cat /proc/version' or check /etc/os-releaseAffected if Firmware version is exactly 250416
-
Verify login page is accessibleAttempt to reach the router login page at http://[router-ip]/ or http://192.168.0.1/ in a browserAffected if Login page loads and accepts authentication input
-
Test for account lockout mechanismAttempt multiple failed login attempts (at least 10-15) using invalid credentials, observing whether any lockout message appears, account becomes temporarily disabled, or delay is introduced between attemptsAffected if No lockout message appears, no account disabling occurs, and no progressive delays are observed after repeated failed attempts
-
Check for rate limiting headers or response delaysUse a tool to send repeated POST requests to the login endpoint (typically /login or /cgi-bin/login) and measure response times, checking for any HTTP 429 responses or increasing delaysAffected if All requests return standard responses without rate limiting and response times remain consistent
User is affected if they have a DIR-823X router running firmware version 250416 and the login page accepts repeated failed attempts without any lockout, delay, or account disabling.
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 dataImplement account lockout after a configurable number of failed attempts, add progressive delays between failed attempts, and/or implement CAPTCHA after multiple failures. For unsupported legacy devices, consider network-level controls such as rate-limiting firewall rules or isolating the device behind a VPN.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-1685 — 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-2026-1685 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