CVE-2026-4113
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 observable response discrepancy vulnerability in the SonicWall SMA1000 series appliances allows a remote attacker to enumerate SSL VPN user credentials.
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 confidenceThe vulnerability allows remote attackers to enumerate valid SSL VPN usernames on SonicWall SMA1000 series appliances through observable differences in system responses during authentication. An attacker can determine which usernames are valid by analyzing how the system responds to different login attempts.
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< 12.4.3-03387>= 12.5.0, < 12.5.0-02624< 12.4.3-03387>= 12.5.0, < 12.5.0-02624< 12.4.3-03387>= 12.5.0, < 12.5.0-02624< 12.4.3-03387>= 12.5.0, < 12.5.0-02624< 12.4.3-03387>= 12.5.0, < 12.5.0-02624CVSS 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 SMA1000 series applianceLocate your SonicWall SMA device model (SMA6200, SMA6210, SMA7200, SMA7210, or SMA8200v) in your network inventory or physical hardware labelsAffected if The device model is one of the listed affected models
-
Check firmware versionAccess the SMA administrative interface and navigate to System > Status or use the command line to run: 'version' or 'show system info'Affected if The firmware version is below 12.4.3-03387 OR is 12.5.0 or higher but below 12.5.0-02624
-
Verify SSL VPN is exposedConfirm that the SSL VPN login portal (typically ports 443 or 8443) is reachable from external networks or untrusted zonesAffected if The SSL VPN interface is accessible from networks where untrusted users could attempt login
-
Test for username enumerationSubmit login attempts with a known-invalid username and a valid-username-candidate, then compare the HTTP response codes, response times, and error messagesAffected if The responses differ between valid and invalid usernames (such as different error messages, different response codes, or timing differences)
Your environment is affected if you operate an exposed SMA1000 series appliance running a firmware version within the vulnerable ranges, and your login page reveals whether a username exists through inconsistent error responses.
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 · scoped12.4.3-0338712.5.0-02624
Apply vendor-supplied patches when available. As an interim measure, implement rate limiting and account lockout policies to reduce enumeration effectiveness, and ensure consistent error messages regardless of username validity.
Upgrade to firmware version 12.4.3-03387 or later, OR version 12.5.0-02624 or later (depending on which branch your current version is on)
- 1. Identify the current firmware version of the affected SonicWall SMA100 series appliance via the web management interface or CLI.
- 2. Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on current version - if below 12.4.3-03387, upgrade to 12.4.3-03387 or later; if >= 12.5.0 but below 12.5.0-02624, upgrade to 12.5.0-02624 or later.
- 3. Download the fixed firmware from the official SonicWall support portal (psirt.global.sonicwall.com references the advisory).
- 4. Back up the current appliance configuration before performing the upgrade.
- 5. Upload and apply the new firmware through the SonicWall administrative interface or via CLI using the firmware upgrade command.
- 6. After the appliance reboots, verify the new firmware version is installed and the vulnerability is resolved.
- 7. Test SSL VPN functionality to ensure normal operation after the upgrade.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4113 — 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-2026-4113 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