CVE-2026-9381
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 BR-6675nD 1.12. Affected by this vulnerability is the function formPPPoESetup of the file /goform/formPPPoESetup of the component POST Request Handler. Performing a manipulation of the argument pppUserName results in buffer overflow. The attack may be initiated 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 · high confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in Edimax BR-6675nD router's PPPoE configuration form (/goform/formPPPoESetup). The pppUserName parameter in POST requests is not properly bounds-checked, allowing remote attackers to overflow the buffer and potentially execute arbitrary code. The exploit is publicly available.
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 router modelCheck the device label on the router or log into the web admin interface and look for the model number in the status or system information pageAffected if The device is NOT an Edimax BR-6675nD (different models are not affected by this specific CVE)
-
Check the installed firmware versionLog into the router web admin interface and navigate to the firmware upgrade or system status page to view the current firmware versionAffected if The firmware version is 1.12 (exact match to the affected version)
-
Verify PPPoE configuration accessNavigate to the PPPoE or WAN settings section in the router web interface to determine if PPPoE configuration functionality is present and accessibleAffected if PPPoE configuration functionality exists and is accessible on the device
-
Confirm web management interface accessibilityAttempt to access the router web interface at the default IP (commonly 192.168.2.1) or the configured LAN IP address using HTTPAffected if The web management interface is reachable from the network
If the device is an Edimax BR-6675nD running firmware version 1.12 and the PPPoE configuration feature is accessible through the web interface, the environment is affected by this buffer overflow vulnerability.
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 Edimax did not respond to disclosure, implement network segmentation to isolate the affected device. If PPPoE is not required, disable the feature. Consider replacing the device with a supported model. Apply input length limits at an upstream firewall if possible.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $4,880.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9381 — 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-2026-9381 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