CVE-2026-9382
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 flaw has been found in Edimax BR-6675nD 1.12. Affected by this issue is the function formPPTPSetup of the file /goform/formPPTPSetup of the component POST Request Handler. Executing a manipulation of the argument pptpUserName can lead to buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been published 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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the Edimax BR-6675nD router firmware (v1.12) within the formPPTPSetup POST request handler. The pptpUserName parameter is not properly bounds-checked, allowing an attacker to overflow the buffer by supplying an overly long username string. This can potentially allow remote code execution on the affected device.
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 modelAccess the router's web interface or check the device label/metadata to confirm the model is Edimax BR-6675nDAffected if Device is not an Edimax BR-6675nD router, then not affected by this specific CVE
-
Check the firmware versionNavigate to the router's web interface status page or use the 'ver' command via telnet/SSH to retrieve the firmware versionAffected if Firmware version is 1.12, then the device is directly affected by this vulnerability
-
Verify PPTP functionality is presentAccess the router's web interface and look for PPTP settings under VPN, WAN, or network configuration sections. Alternatively, probe for the /goform/formPPTPSetup endpointAffected if The PPTP configuration interface exists and the pptpUserName parameter is accepted, the vulnerability is exploitable if the device is reachable
-
Confirm web interface accessibilityDetermine if the router's HTTP/HTTPS management interface is exposed to the network (check firewall rules, WAN interface binding)Affected if The web interface is accessible from untrusted networks, remote exploitation is possible
The device is affected if it is an Edimax BR-6675nD running firmware version 1.12, has PPTP functionality exposed via the web interface, and the management interface is reachable from the network where the attacker resides.
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 the vendor did not respond and no patch is available, mitigate by disabling PPTP functionality if not required, placing the device in an isolated network segment, and strongly considering replacement of this end-of-life device with a supported model.
- 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-2026-9382 — 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-2026-9382 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