CVE-2026-57876
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 out-of-bounds write vulnerability exists in onvif.cgi in GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 V1.12 and earlier. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient bounds checking when processing HTTP request body data. A remote attacker may exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted request with excessive input, causing memory corruption and resulting in a 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 confidenceAn unauthenticated out-of-bounds write vulnerability exists in onvif.cgi in GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 cameras (V1.12 and earlier). Insufficient bounds checking when processing HTTP request body data allows remote attackers to send crafted requests with excessive input, causing memory corruption and denial of service.
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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 the camera modelAccess the camera's web interface or check the device label to confirm it is a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 model.Affected if The device is a GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 camera.
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the camera's web interface and navigate to the System or Firmware Information section to view the current firmware version.Affected if The firmware version is V1.12 or earlier.
-
Verify onvif.cgi endpoint accessibilityAttempt to access the onvif.cgi endpoint by sending an HTTP request to http://<camera_ip>/cgi-bin/onvif.cgi or similar path used by the device.Affected if The onvif.cgi endpoint responds to unauthenticated HTTP requests.
-
Assess network exposureReview firewall rules, NAT configurations, and network access control lists to determine if the camera is reachable from untrusted networks.Affected if The camera and its onvif.cgi endpoint are accessible from the internet or untrusted networks without VPN or firewall restrictions.
The environment is affected if you have a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 camera running firmware V1.12 or earlier with onvif.cgi exposed to untrusted network access.
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 dataUpgrade GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 firmware to a version later than V1.12. If firmware update is unavailable, restrict network access to the onvif.cgi endpoint via firewall or VPN to limit exposure.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57876 — 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-2026-57876 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