CVE-2026-7854
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 vulnerability has been detected in D-Link DI-8100 16.07.26A1. Affected by this vulnerability is the function url_rule_asp of the file /url_rule.asp of the component POST Parameter Handler. Such manipulation leads to buffer overflow. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.
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 buffer overflow vulnerability in the POST parameter handler of D-Link DI-8100 router firmware 16.07.26A1, specifically in the url_rule_asp function of /url_rule.asp, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted HTTP POST requests due to improper bounds checking.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 16.07.26a1CVSS 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 router's web interface or check the device label to confirm it is a D-Link DI-8100 modelAffected if The device is not a D-Link DI-8100 router, then it is not affected by this specific CVE
-
Determine the firmware versionLog into the router web interface and navigate to the System Status or Firmware Upgrade page to view the current firmware version, or use the command line if accessible to check the firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is not 16.07.26a1, then it is not affected by this specific CVE
-
Verify the exact version stringConfirm the firmware version reads exactly as 16.07.26a1 (case-sensitive match to the affected version)Affected if The version string differs from 16.07.26a1 in any way, the device is not affected
-
Check web interface accessibilityAttempt to access the /url_rule.asp endpoint via HTTP/HTTPS from the local network (e.g., http://<router-ip>/url_rule.asp)Affected if The endpoint is unreachable or returns an error, the vulnerable code path may not be exposed but the firmware is still affected if version matches
A user is affected only if they have an exact D-Link DI-8100 router running firmware version 16.07.26a1.
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 dataThe D-Link DI-8100 is end-of-life with no vendor patches available; organizations should restrict or disable remote management access to the device's web interface at the network perimeter, or replace with a supported router model.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7854 — 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-2026-7854 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