CVE-2026-4188
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 security flaw has been discovered in D-Link DIR-619L 2.06B01. The affected element is the function formSchedule of the file /goform/formSchedule of the component boa. Performing a manipulation of the argument curTime results in stack-based buffer overflow. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.
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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow in D-Link DIR-619L router's boa web server. The formSchedule function in /goform/formSchedule fails to properly validate the curTime parameter, allowing remote attackers to overflow the stack and potentially achieve arbitrary code execution.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Confirm device modelAccess the router web interface or check the device label/marketing to verify the model is D-Link DIR-619LAffected if The device is a D-Link DIR-619L router
-
Verify boa web server is activeAttempt to access the router web interface on port 80 or 443 (e.g., http://<router-ip>/). If the login page or any web content loads, the boa web server is running.Affected if The router web interface is accessible and responds to HTTP/HTTPS requests
-
Check formSchedule endpoint availabilitySend a GET or POST request to http://<router-ip>/goform/formSchedule. A response (even an error) indicates the vulnerable endpoint exists.Affected if The /goform/formSchedule endpoint responds to requests
-
Assess network exposureDetermine if the router's web interface is reachable from untrusted networks (WAN/internet) by checking port forwarding rules, WAN IP accessibility, or firewall policies.Affected if The router web interface is accessible from untrusted/network-facing interfaces
You are affected if you have a D-Link DIR-619L router with its web interface accessible, particularly from untrusted networks, as the vulnerable boa web server's formSchedule function handles the curTime parameter without bounds checking.
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 dataNo vendor patch available as the product is end-of-life. Retire and replace with a supported router, or implement network segmentation/access controls to limit exposure to trusted users only.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4188 — 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-2026-4188 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