VulnerabilityPublished 15 Aug 2025

CVE-2025-9026: D-Link DIR-860L · OS Command Injection

Affects D-Link DIR-860LSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 6.9 Medium · end of life, no fix coming : replace or isolate D-Link DIR-860L; no fix will be released.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 3.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 89% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: None coming – the product is end of life

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Aug 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

No fix will be released: D-Link DIR-860L is end of life. Replace it, or isolate it from untrusted networks until you can.

AI-suggested

Since no official patches are available due to the end-of-life status of the affected product, organizations should prioritize replacing the D-Link DIR-860L routers with supported, updated models that receive regular security updates. Network administrators should isolate these devices from critical network segments and restrict remote access to the management interfaces, ideally disabling SSDP services if possible. Implementing network-level protections such as firewall rules to block unsolicited inbound traffic targeting the router's management ports can reduce exposure. Monitoring network traffic for unusual patterns or command injection attempts can help detect exploitation attempts early. Employing network segmentation and strict access controls will limit the potential impact if a device is compromised. Additionally, organizations should educate users about the risks of using unsupported hardware and encourage timely hardware upgrades. For environments where immediate replacement is not feasible, deploying compensating controls such as VPNs for remote access and enhanced logging can mitigate risk.

Description

A vulnerability was identified in D-Link DIR-860L 2.04.B04. This affects the function ssdpcgi_main of the file htdocs/cgibin of the component Simple Service Discovery Protocol. The manipulation leads to os command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability can be significant, particularly for small and medium enterprises or home offices that still use the affected D-Link DIR-860L routers. Successful exploitation could allow attackers to gain control over the router, leading to interception or manipulation of network traffic, deployment of malware, or use of the device as a foothold for lateral movement within corporate networks. Given that the device is often used as a gateway, compromise could result in data breaches, loss of network integrity, or denial of service conditions. The lack of vendor support means organizations cannot rely on official patches, increasing the risk of prolonged exposure. Additionally, attackers could use compromised routers as part of botnets or for launching further attacks, impacting network availability and reputation. While larger enterprises may have more robust network infrastructure and replacement policies, smaller organizations and residential users in Europe may be disproportionately affected, especially in countries where this router model has higher market penetration. The vulnerability also poses risks to critical infrastructure if such devices are used in less secure environments or by third-party providers.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Aug 2025, 10:02 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats