Directory Traversal vulnerability in app_data_center on Shenzhen Tenda Ac9 US_AC9V1.0BR_V15.03.05.14_multi_TD01, Ac9 ac9_kf_V15.03.05.19(631
Directory Traversal vulnerability in app_data_center on Shenzhen Tenda Ac9 US_AC9V1.0BR_V15.03.05.14_multi_TD01, Ac9 ac9_kf_V15.03.05.19(6318_)_cn, Ac15 US_AC15V1.0BR_V15.03.05.18_multi_TD01, Ac15 US_AC15V1.0BR_V15.03.05.19_multi_TD01, Ac18 US_AC18V1.0BR_V15.03.05.05_multi_TD01, and Ac18 ac18_kf_V15.03.05.19(6318_)_cn devices allows remote unauthenticated attackers to read arbitrary files via a cgi-bin/luci/request?op=1&path= URI that uses directory traversal sequences after a /usb/ substring.
- Published
- Nov 24, 2017
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.0% · 62th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-22
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.0%
Affected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| tenda | ac9 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:tenda:ac9_firmware |
| tenda | ac9 | cpe:2.3:h:tenda:ac9 |
| tenda | ac15 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:tenda:ac15_firmware |
| tenda | ac15 | cpe:2.3:h:tenda:ac15 |
| tenda | ac18 firmware | cpe:2.3:o:tenda:ac18_firmware |
| tenda | ac18 | cpe:2.3:h:tenda:ac18 |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- tenda ac15 firmwareus_ac15v1.0br_v15.03.05.18_multi_td01
- tenda ac15 firmwareus_ac15v1.0br_v15.03.05.19_multi_td01
- tenda ac18 firmwareac18_kf_v15.03.05.19(6318_)_cn
- tenda ac18 firmwareus_ac18v1.0br_v15.03.05.05_multi_td01
- tenda ac9 firmwareac9_kf_v15.03.05.19(6318_)_cn
- tenda ac9 firmwareus_ac9v1.0br_v15.03.05.14_multi_td01
Same product
tenda: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-25434Tenda AC9 v15.03.2.21 was discovered to contain a stack overflow via the firewallen parameter in the SetFirewallCfg function.42Plan
- CVE-2022-25414Tenda AC9 V15.03.2.21_cn was discovered to contain a stack overflow via the parameter NPTR.42Plan
- CVE-2025-44877Tenda AC9 V15.03.06.42_multi was found to contain a command injection vulnerability in the formSetSambaConf function via the usbname paramet40Plan
- CVE-2025-44872Tenda AC9 V15.03.06.42_multi was found to contain a command injection vulnerability in the formsetUsbUnload function via the deviceName para40Plan
- CVE-2025-29384In Tenda AC9 v1.0 V15.03.05.14_multi, the wanMTU parameter of /goform/AdvSetMacMtuWan has a stack overflow vulnerability, which can lead to 40Plan
- CVE-2025-22949Tenda ac9 v1.0 firmware v15.03.05.19 is vulnerable to command injection in /goform/SetSambaCfg, which may lead to remote arbitrary code exec40Plan
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Root cause
A user-supplied file name is joined with the allowed directory, but the result is never checked to confirm it is still inside that directory.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-22 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const file = path.join(ROOT, req.query.name);res.sendFile(file);Fixed
const file = path.resolve(ROOT, req.query.name);if (!file.startsWith(ROOT + path.sep)) { return res.sendStatus(400);}res.sendFile(file);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Path TraversalCAPEC-126likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-64likelihood: High · High
- Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-76likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-78likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-79likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpChange log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.