CVE-2021-32030ASUS Routers Improper Authentication Vulnerability
CVE-2021-32030 is a improper authentication in ASUS Routers, rated critical (9.8 on CVSS 3.1).
Why this priority: Exploited in the wild: listed in CISA's KEV catalog.
Published · Updated · NVD status: Analyzed
What it is
The software does not prove who a caller is, so an attacker can pass as someone else.
How it is reached
An attacker can exploit it over the network, without an account, and nobody has to click anything.
What an attacker gains
A successful attack can read the data it protects, change data or behaviour and take it offline. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker act as a signed-in user, or an administrator, without valid credentials.
Is it being exploited?
CISA added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on 2025-06-02: it is being exploited in the wild. It can be exploited automatically, at scale. EPSS estimates a 99% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, higher than 100% of scored CVEs.
What to do
- Treat it as urgent: it is on CISA's KEV list. CISA's deadline for US federal agencies: 2025-06-23.
- No fixed version is listed for ASUS Routers itself; fixed versions for the other affected products are listed on this page.
- Until it is patched, keep it off the internet or behind a VPN, allowlist or authenticating proxy.
- Check exposed instances for signs of compromise, not only for the version.
Description from NVD
The administrator application on ASUS GT-AC2900 devices before 3.0.0.4.386.42643 and Lyra Mini before 3.0.0.4_384_46630 allows authentication bypass when processing remote input from an unauthenticated user, leading to unauthorized access to the administrator interface. This relates to handle_request in router/httpd/httpd.c and auth_check in web_hook.o. An attacker-supplied value of '\0' matches the device's default value of '\0' in some situations. Note: All versions of Lyra Mini and earlier which are unsupported (End-of-Life, EOL) are also affected by this vulnerability, Consumers can mitigate this vulnerability by disabling the remote access features from WAN.
What this means for your architecture.
A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.
Components it touches
- Network edge devices: VPNs, firewalls, routers and gateways. They sit between the internet and internal networks, so a flaw in one is often the first step into everything behind it.
- Operating systems on servers, workstations or devices. Everything on the host inherits the flaw.
- Sign-in, session and token handling. The flaw sits between anonymous callers and authenticated sessions.
- Identity providers and SSO. The flaw sits between anonymous callers and authenticated sessions.
Trust boundaries in play
- Internet-facing entry points. No account is needed. Any instance reachable from outside your perimeter, through a load balancer, gateway, VPN or exposed admin port, is in scope.
- Between anonymous callers and authenticated sessions. An attacker who crosses it can act as a signed-in user, or an administrator, without valid credentials.
Questions to answer about your own systems
- Where does ASUS Routers run in your systems, and at which version?
- Which of those instances can be reached from the internet or partner networks?
- What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?
Read more
Exploits and proofs of concept
Sources
- CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
- Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
- Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
- Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.