CVE-2026-57872
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 unauthenticated directory traversal vulnerability exists in get_fcont.cgi in GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 V1.12 and earlier. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient validation of user-supplied file path input before the requested file is accessed by the CGI component. A remote attacker may exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted request to read arbitrary files accessible to the affected process, resulting in information disclosure.
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 confidenceAn unauthenticated directory traversal vulnerability in get_fcont.cgi of GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 IP cameras (V1.12 and earlier) allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files by supplying traversal sequences (e.g., ../../) in user-supplied file path parameters, due to insufficient input validation before file access.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Identify device modelAccess the device web interface or check device documentation to confirm the model is GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211. This can often be done by logging into the admin panel or checking the device label.Affected if The device is a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 IP camera
-
Check firmware versionLog into the device admin panel and navigate to System Information or Firmware version settings to identify the installed firmware version. Compare against V1.12.Affected if The firmware version is V1.12 or earlier
-
Verify web interface accessibilityAttempt to access the device web interface by navigating to the device IP address in a web browser. Check if the CGI scripts (including get_fcont.cgi) are reachable via HTTP/HTTPS.Affected if The web interface and get_fcont.cgi are accessible from the network being assessed
-
Test for directory traversal vulnerabilitySend an HTTP request to get_fcont.cgi with directory traversal sequences in a file path parameter, for example: GET /cgi-bin/get_fcont.cgi?file=../../../../etc/passwd. Examine the response for file contents or error messages indicating traversal is possible.Affected if The CGI script returns content from files outside the intended directory or displays path traversal behavior
The device is affected if it is a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 with firmware V1.12 or earlier, and the web interface with get_fcont.cgi is accessible and allows directory traversal via user-supplied path parameters.
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 dataRestrict external access to affected devices via firewall/network segmentation, implement strict input validation and path sanitization in the CGI component, and apply vendor patches if available.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57872 — 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-2026-57872 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