CVE-2026-57881
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 vlsvr in GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 V1.12 and earlier. The vulnerability is caused by insufficient length validation when processing remote login data. A remote attacker may exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted login data 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 vulnerability exists in the vlsvr component of GeoVision GV-LPC2011 and GV-LPC2211 devices running firmware V1.12 and earlier. The vulnerability stems from insufficient length validation when processing remote login data, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to send overly long crafted login input that overflows a stack buffer, potentially leading to memory corruption, DoS, or 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 modelAccess the device admin interface or check device documentation to confirm the model is GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211Affected if The device is a GeoVision GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 unit
-
Check the firmware versionLog into the device admin panel or use the vendor's configuration tool to view the current firmware version. Compare it to V1.12 or earlier.Affected if The installed firmware version is V1.12 or any version prior to V1.12
-
Verify vlsvr component is activeCheck the device services or running processes to confirm the vlsvr component is enabled. This is typically the video login service.Affected if The vlsvr component is running and accessible on the device
-
Assess network exposure of the login serviceDetermine if the device login port (commonly port 4550 for GeoVision) is exposed directly to untrusted networks or the internet rather than behind a protected firewall or VPN.Affected if The login service port is reachable from untrusted network segments or the public internet
-
Review for exploitation indicatorsCheck device logs for unexpected login failures, service restarts, or unusual network traffic patterns to the login service port.Affected if Logs or network logs show suspicious login attempts with unusually long input or service anomalies
You are affected if you own a GV-LPC2011 or GV-LPC2211 device running firmware V1.12 or earlier, with the vlsvr component exposed to 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 dataApply vendor firmware patches when available; until then, isolate affected devices behind a firewall or VPN, restrict network access to trusted IPs, and monitor for signs of exploitation. If no patch exists, consider network segmentation or device replacement.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $3,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57881 — 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-2026-57881 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