What is CVE-2026-76652?

CVE-2026-76652 is Authenticated Directory Traversal Vulnerability in File Upload Functionality in TP-Link TL-MR6400 and Archer MR600. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Path Traversal mapped to CWE-22 Path Traversal.

Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-76652. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-76652 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

1 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with Not reported where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-76652 using CVSS 4.8, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

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. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

mediumPath Traversalpublic exploit

CVE-2026-76652

CVE-2026-76652 — Authenticated Directory Traversal Vulnerability in File Upload Functionality in TP-Link TL-MR6400 and Archer MR600

An authenticated directory traversal vulnerability in file upload functionality has been identified in Archer MR600 (v2, v3 & v5) and TL-MR6400 v8. Due to insufficient validation of user-supplied file information, an authenticated remote attacker with access to the affected upload functionality could upload a specially crafted file and cause it to be written outside the intended directory. Successful exploitation could allow an authenticated remote attacker to write files to unintended locations, potentially overwriting or modifying files accessible to the affected service; arbitrary code execution has not been demonstrated.

Published Sep 10, 2026Updated Sep 10, 2026Sources: NVD, TP-Link Systems Inc. (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

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

TP-Link Systems Inc.

4 products listed

CVSS base

4.8

medium

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade TL-MR6400 v8 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
TP-Link Systems Inc.	TL-MR6400 v8	0 to < 1.5.0 0.9.1 v0001.0 Build 260610 Rel.67978n	Vulnerable
TP-Link Systems Inc.	Archer MR600	v3	Vulnerable
TP-Link Systems Inc.	Archer MR600	v5	Vulnerable
TP-Link Systems Inc.	Archer MR600	v2	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

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

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Adjacent

Privileges Req

High

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
4.8	CVSS 4.0	medium	—	—	TP-Link Systems Inc. (CNA)

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

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-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')

Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
Modify Files or Directories
Read Files or Directories
DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Mitigation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an accept known good input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, boat may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as red or blue. Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single . character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as / to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering / is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if ../ sequences are removed from the .../...// string in a sequential fashion, two instances of ../ would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the ../ string.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-22Path Traversal

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

CAPEC-126 · Path TraversalCAPEC-76 · Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-79 · Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-64 · Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-78 · Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding

Public exploit

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

Repositories

Detection

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

Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 1 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 4.8 (AV:A)
Sep 10, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Sep 10, 2026 · NVD
CVE published by MITRE.
Sep 10, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

3 on the record

www.tp-link.com/en/support/download/archer-mr600/v5/#Firmware
Vendor Advisory
www.tp-link.com/en/support/download/tl-mr6400/v8/#Firmware
Vendor Advisory
www.tp-link.com/us/support/faq/5292/
Vendor Advisory

Elsewhere on this site

TP-Link Systems Inc.every CVE for this vendor
Path Traversalsame class
CWE-22other 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-2026-76652 is Authenticated Directory Traversal Vulnerability in File Upload Functionality in TP-Link TL-MR6400 and Archer MR600, a medium vulnerability affecting TL-MR6400 v8, Archer MR600 from TP-Link Systems Inc.. 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-2026-76652. Public exploit evidence is: 1 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 4.8 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.