CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
highRemote Code Execpublic exploit

CVE-2026-19792

CVE-2026-19792 — Tenda G0 httpd web management interface module setPortMapping buffer overflow

A security flaw has been discovered in Tenda G0 up to 20260625. Impacted is the function setPortMapping of the file /goform/module of the component httpd web management interface. Performing a manipulation of the argument portMappingServer/porMappingtInternal/portMappingExternal results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.

Published Updated Sources: NVD, Tenda (CNA), GitHub, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

0%

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

Tenda

G0

CVSS base

8.8

high · 6 sources

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade G0 to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

  • Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
  • Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
  • Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatus
TendaG020260625Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

High

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

Low

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
8.8CVSS 3.1high2.85.9NVD
9CVSS 2.0high810vuldb.com (CNA)
8.7CVSS 4.0highTenda (CNA)
8.8CVSS 3.1highTenda (CNA)
8.8CVSS 3.0highTenda (CNA)
9CVSS 2.0criticalTenda (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-120 · Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')

  • Modify Memory
  • Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
  • DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
  • DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)

Mitigation: 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.

CWE-119 · Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer

  • Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
  • Modify Memory
  • Read Memory
  • DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Mitigation: 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.

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-120
  • CWE-119

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-14 · Client-side Injection-induced Buffer OverflowCAPEC-9 · Buffer Overflow in Local Command-Line UtilitiesCAPEC-45 · Buffer Overflow via Symbolic LinksCAPEC-46 · Overflow Variables and TagsCAPEC-123 · Buffer ManipulationCAPEC-100 · Overflow BuffersCAPEC-8 · Buffer Overflow in an API CallCAPEC-24 · Filter Failure through Buffer OverflowCAPEC-10 · Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-47 · Buffer Overflow via Parameter ExpansionCAPEC-44 · Overflow Binary Resource FileCAPEC-42 · MIME Conversion

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

3

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /goform/module, /porMappingtInternal/portMappingExternal.
  • Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable G0.
  • Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 3 public PoC repositories were reported.
web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPSEDR process telemetryhost service logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

  1. 2026
  2. Added · CVSS 3.1 8.8 (AV:N)

    Aug 14, 2026 · NVD

  3. Initial · CVE published

    Aug 14, 2026 · NVD

  4. CVE published by mitre

    Aug 14, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

  5. Reported · Advisory disclosed

    Aug 13, 2026 · Tenda

  6. Reported · VulDB entry created

    Aug 13, 2026 · Tenda

  7. Reported · VulDB entry last update

    Aug 13, 2026 · Tenda

Source activity

Readings a source repeats on a schedule, counted rather than listed.

  • CVE modified by NIST, Cweid, Modified, LinkAug 14, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

6 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-19792 is Tenda G0 httpd web management interface module setPortMapping buffer overflow, a high vulnerability affecting G0 from Tenda. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-19792. Public exploit evidence is: 3 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 8.8 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.