CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
CRITICAL

CVE-2026-91003

CVE-2026-91003 — D-Link DI-8300 CGI Service rzgl.asp rzgl_asp stack-based overflow

A flaw has been found in D-Link DI-8300 16.07. The affected element is the function rzgl_asp of the file /rzgl.asp of the component CGI Service. This manipulation of the argument redirct_url causes stack-based buffer overflow. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been published and may be used.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, VulDB

Triage

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

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

1%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

d link

di_8300

CVSS base

9.1

CRITICAL

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

PoC

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Total

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

Products (1)

di 8300

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
9.1CVSS 3.1CRITICAL——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-121
  • CWE-119

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 /rzgl.asp.

References

7 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • d linkevery CVE for this vendor
  • 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.