VigorAP 918R: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input
CVE-2026-71911 is a high-severity buffer copy without checking size of input vulnerability in VigorAP 918R from DrayTek, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.2 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with administrator privileges, without any action from a user. The record lists version 1.4.11 as the first without the flaw, so updating VigorAP 918R to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.68% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 53% of scored CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update VigorAP 918R to 1.4.11 or a later version.
- Update VigorAP 960C to 1.4.12 or a later version.
- Update VigorAP 1060C to 1.4.12 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on draytek.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| DrayTek | VigorAP 918R | before 1.4.11 | 1.4.11 |
| DrayTek | VigorAP 960C | before 1.4.12 | 1.4.12 |
| DrayTek | VigorAP 1060C | before 1.4.12 | 1.4.12 |
| DrayTek | VigorAP 906 | before 1.4.13 | 1.4.13 |
| DrayTek | VigorAP 912C | before 1.4.15 | 1.4.15 |
| DrayTek | VigorAP 903 | before 1.4.22 | 1.4.22 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- HighAdministrator-level access is required first.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 8.6 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.2 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
Official description
Multiple DrayTek VigorAP models contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in the setLan function. The vulnerability is caused by missing length checks during memory copy operations involving the lanVlanId0, lanIp, and lanNetmask fields. A remote attacker can trigger this vulnerability via crafted input, causing a denial of service or potentially executing arbitrary commands. Exploitation requires valid administrative credentials for the device's web management interface.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input
The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
- Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.
More Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input vulnerabilities (CWE-120)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other vulnerabilities in VigorAP 918R
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
Recent Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input vulnerabilities
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.