CVE-2026-57878
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 stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in thttpd in GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 V1.12 and earlier. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient bounds checking when processing web request parameters in a specific request path. A remote attacker may exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted HTTP request with overly long input, resulting in memory corruption, denial of service, or potentially arbitrary code execution.
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 confidenceA stack-based buffer overflow in thttpd web server on GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 devices (V1.12 and earlier) allows remote unauthenticated attackers to overflow a buffer via overly long HTTP request parameters in a specific request path, potentially leading to 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 the device modelCheck the device label, web interface, or system information to confirm it is a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 modelAffected if The device is not one of these two models
-
Check the firmware versionAccess the device's web interface, administrative console, or firmware/version settings page and note the installed firmware version numberAffected if The firmware version is V1.12 or any version lower than V1.12
-
Verify the web interface is enabledAttempt to access the device's HTTP web interface on the expected IP address or confirm via administrative settings that the thttpd web server is turned onAffected if The web interface is enabled and reachable over the network
-
Confirm network accessibility of the deviceCheck if the device HTTP port is exposed to untrusted networks or the internet by reviewing firewall rules, network configuration, or performing a port scan on the device IPAffected if The device web interface is accessible from untrusted networks
A user is affected if the device is a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 running firmware V1.12 or earlier with the thttpd web interface enabled and accessible on the network.
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 dataIf vendor firmware update is unavailable, implement network segmentation to isolate the device, deploy a WAF to filter malicious requests, or disable the web interface if not operationally required.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57878 — 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-2026-57878 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