CVE-2026-9462
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 1.31. Affected by this vulnerability is the function formWpsProxyEnable of the file /goform/formWpsProxyEnable. The manipulation of the argument submit-url results in stack-based buffer overflow. The attack can be launched 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 confidenceStack-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Edimax EW-7438RPn v1.31 wireless range extender allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via the submit-url parameter in the formWpsProxyEnable function at /goform/formWpsProxyEnable. The CVSS 8.8 score indicates high exploitability with low privileges required.
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 EW-7438RPnAccess the device web interface status page or check the device label/SSH banner for the exact model number EW-7438RPnAffected if Device is not an Edimax EW-7438RPn
-
Identify firmware versionLogin to the web management interface, navigate to Status or System Settings, and record the firmware version numberAffected if Firmware version is v1.31
-
Verify web interface is network-accessibleCheck network exposure of the device management IP - determine if HTTP/HTTPS ports are reachable from untrusted network segmentsAffected if Web interface is exposed to untrusted networks or the internet
-
Confirm vulnerable endpoint existsAttempt to access the URI /goform/formWpsProxyEnable on the device (the vulnerable form handler)Affected if Endpoint responds with any HTTP status code
Device is affected if it is an Edimax EW-7438RPn running firmware v1.31 and its web management interface is accessible to network attackers who can reach the /goform/formWpsProxyEnable endpoint
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 to early disclosure and no patch is available, isolate the device on a restricted network segment, disable WPS functionality if possible, and consider replacing the device with a supported model.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-9462 — 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-2026-9462 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