CVE-2026-9442
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 weakness has been identified in Edimax BR-6478AC 1.23. This affects the function formiNICSiteSurvey of the file /goform/formiNICSiteSurvey of the component POST Request Handler. Executing a manipulation of the argument selSSID can lead to buffer overflow. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. 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 vulnerability in Edimax BR-6478AC router firmware 1.23 allows remote attackers to overflow a buffer via the selSSID parameter in POST requests to /goform/formiNICSiteSurvey. The formiNICSiteSurvey function does not properly validate input length before copying to a fixed-size buffer, leading to memory corruption that could enable remote code execution.
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.
-
Confirm device model is Edimax BR-6478ACAccess the router web administration interface and check the device information page, or log in via telnet/SSH if available and run 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' or check the model from the initial boot logs.Affected if The device is an Edimax BR-6478AC router.
-
Identify installed firmware versionIn the router web UI, navigate to System Status or Administration > Firmware Upgrade to view the current firmware version. Alternatively, check via telnet/SSH using 'nvram get firmware_version' or similar command if accessible.Affected if The firmware version is 1.23.
-
Verify the formiNICSiteSurvey endpoint existsSend a POST request to http://[router-ip]/goform/formiNICSiteSurvey with any payload. A response (even an error) indicates the handler exists. You can also check if the Wi-Fi scanning or site survey feature is accessible in the web UI.Affected if The endpoint /goform/formiNICSiteSurvey responds to POST requests, indicating the vulnerable handler is present.
-
Assess network exposure of admin interfaceDetermine if the router web administration interface (port 80/443) is reachable from untrusted networks. Use 'nmap -p 80,443 [router-ip]' from an external network or verify access control lists on upstream firewalls.Affected if The router admin interface is accessible from networks other than trusted management VLANs.
If the device is an Edimax BR-6478AC running firmware version 1.23 and the /goform/formiNICSiteSurvey endpoint is accessible, the device 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 dataNetwork isolation and firewall rules to restrict access to the router's web management interface from untrusted networks; if available, apply vendor firmware update; otherwise consider replacing affected devices. Input validation fixes in the formiNICSiteSurvey function with proper bounds checking would be required for a code-level fix.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9442 — 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-2026-9442 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