CVE-2026-9345
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 vulnerability was detected in Edimax EW-7438RPn up to 1.31. This affects the function formWizSurvey of the file /goform/formWizSurvey of the component webs. Performing a manipulation of the argument ssid/manualssid/ip/mask/gateway results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 · moderate confidenceBuffer overflow in Edimax EW-7438RPn WiFi range extender web interface (formWizSurvey function). The /goform/formWizSurvey handler fails to validate input length for ssid/manualssid/ip/mask/gateway parameters, allowing remote attackers to overflow buffers via crafted HTTP requests.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 on the Edimax EW-7438RPn unit, or access the web interface and look for the model name on the status or login pageAffected if The device is an Edimax EW-7438RPn
-
Determine the firmware versionLog into the web interface and navigate to System or Status settings to view the firmware version, or check via telnet/SSH if enabledAffected if The firmware version is 1.31 or any version up to 1.31
-
Verify the web interface is accessibleAttempt to reach the device web interface by entering its IP address in a browser from the networkAffected if The HTTP interface is reachable on the network (this is required for the attack vector)
-
Confirm the vulnerable endpoint existsSend an HTTP GET or POST request to http://<device_ip>/goform/formWizSurvey and observe the responseAffected if The endpoint responds (indicates the webs component with formWizSurvey is present and potentially vulnerable)
You are affected if you have an Edimax EW-7438RPn device running firmware version 1.31 or below, with its web interface 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 dataSince vendor did not respond, implement network segmentation to isolate the device; if firmware update becomes available, apply it immediately; otherwise consider device replacement.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,600.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9345 — 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-2026-9345 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