CVE-2026-19824
CVE-2026-19824 — Tenda W20E addIpMacBind ipMacBindListStore stack-based overflow
A weakness has been identified in Tenda W20E 15.11.0.6(1068_1546_841)_CN_TDC. The affected element is the function ipMacBindListStore of the file /goform/addIpMacBind. Executing a manipulation of the argument IPMacBindRule can lead to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could 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
CVSS base
8.8
high · 6 sources
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade W20E 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.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tenda | W20E | 15.11.0.6(1068_1546_841)_CN_TDC | Vulnerable |
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.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.1 | high | 2.8 | 5.9 | NVD |
| 9 | CVSS 2.0 | high | 8 | 10 | vuldb.com (CNA) |
| 8.7 | CVSS 4.0 | high | — | — | Tenda (CNA) |
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.1 | high | — | — | Tenda (CNA) |
| 8.8 | CVSS 3.0 | high | — | — | Tenda (CNA) |
| 9 | CVSS 2.0 | critical | — | — | Tenda (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.
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.
CWE-121 · Stack-based Buffer Overflow
- Modify Memory
- DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
- DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU)
- DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
Mitigation: Run or compile the software using features or extensions that automatically provide a protection mechanism that mitigates or eliminates buffer overflows. For example, certain compilers and extensions provide automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are built into the compiled code. Examples include the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice.
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-121
- CWE-119
Inferred from the weakness class — not observed against this CVE.
Public exploit
Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.
Repositories
4
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/addIpMacBind.
- Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable W20E.
- Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 4 public PoC repositories were reported.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.
- 2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 8.8 (AV:N)
Aug 14, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Aug 14, 2026 · NVD
Reported · Advisory disclosed
Aug 14, 2026 · Tenda
Reported · VulDB entry created
Aug 14, 2026 · Tenda
Reported · VulDB entry last update
Aug 14, 2026 · Tenda
CVE published by mitre
Aug 14, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
References
6 on the record
- github.com/paueger/mycve/blob/main/Tenda_W20E/5.md
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
- vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-19824
Vendor Advisory
- vuldb.com/submit/869024
Vendor Advisory
- vuldb.com/vuln/389957
Vendor Advisory
- vuldb.com/vuln/389957/cti
Vendor Advisory
- www.tenda.com.cn/
Vendor Advisory
Elsewhere on this site
- Tendaevery CVE for this vendor
- Remote Code Execsame class
- CWE-121other pages naming this weakness
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-2026-19824 is Tenda W20E addIpMacBind ipMacBindListStore stack-based overflow, a high vulnerability affecting W20E 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-2026-19824. Public exploit evidence is: 4 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.