CVE-2026-9439
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 determined in Edimax BR-6675nD 1.12. Affected is the function stainfo of the file /goform/stainfo. This manipulation of the argument interface causes command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. 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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in Edimax BR-6675nD router web interface (version 1.12). The stainfo function in /goform/stainfo fails to sanitize the 'interface' parameter, allowing remote attackers to inject arbitrary OS commands via the HTTP POST request.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 device modelAccess the device web interface or check the device label/marketing materials to confirm it is an Edimax BR-6675nD routerAffected if The device is an Edimax BR-6675nD model
-
Check firmware versionLog into the web management interface and navigate to the status or system settings page to view the firmware version, or use the device's web interface to check the current installed versionAffected if The firmware version is 1.12 or earlier (the specific version mentioned as affected)
-
Verify web management interface is accessibleAttempt to access the router's web interface from the network where the device is deployed by navigating to its IP address (commonly 192.168.1.1) in a web browserAffected if The web management interface is reachable from a network segment accessible to potential attackers
-
Confirm stainfo endpoint is availableCheck if the /goform/stainfo endpoint responds by accessing it directly or observing network traffic to the device's web interfaceAffected if The /goform/stainfo endpoint is accessible and responds to requests
-
Determine if remote authentication is possibleVerify whether default credentials have not been changed or whether the device allows authentication from the network segment where attackers could reach itAffected if The device accepts authentication credentials from a remote network location (as opposed to local-only access)
You are affected if you are running Edimax BR-6675nD firmware version 1.12, the web interface is network-accessible, and the stainfo function can be reached with valid authentication credentials.
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 isolating the device on a restricted network segment, blocking external access to the web interface via firewall rules, or replacing the device with a supported model.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9439 — 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-2026-9439 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