CVE-2005-4224
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedMultiple "potential" SQL injection vulnerabilities in e107 0.7 might allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via (1) the email, hideemail, image, realname, signature, timezone, and xupexist parameters in signup.php, (2) the content_comment, content_rating, and content_summary parameters in subcontent.php, (3) the download_category and file_demo in upload.php, and (4) the email, hideemail, user_timezone, and user_xup parameters in usersettings.php.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceMultiple SQL injection vulnerabilities in e107 0.7 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via unsanitized input in signup.php, subcontent.php, upload.php, and usersettings.php. Affected parameters include email, hideemail, realname, signature, timezone, content_comment, content_rating, download_category, and user_timezone.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 0.7CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm e107 CMS installationLocate e107 installation directory and identify if the CMS is present. Check for e107-specific files such as e107_config.php or index.php containing e107 branding.Affected if e107 CMS is installed on the server
-
Identify e107 versionCheck the version.php file within the e107 installation directory, or inspect the e107_config.php file for version metadata. Compare the version number to 0.7.Affected if The installed version is exactly 0.7
-
Locate affected PHP filesWithin the e107 root directory, verify the presence of signup.php, subcontent.php, upload.php, and usersettings.php. These files handle user input processing.Affected if Any of the four affected files (signup.php, subcontent.php, upload.php, usersettings.php) exist in the installation
-
Check parameter exposureExamine the identified PHP files for usage of the vulnerable parameters: email, hideemail, realname, signature, timezone, content_comment, content_rating, download_category, and user_timezone. Search for direct use of these POST or GET parameters in SQL queries without apparent sanitization.Affected if The affected parameters are processed by the vulnerable files without parameterized queries
A user is affected if e107 version 0.7 is installed and the vulnerable files (signup.php, subcontent.php, upload.php, usersettings.php) process user-supplied input without sanitization.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to a patched version of e107. If upgrade is not feasible, implement parameterized queries or prepared statements for all user-supplied input in the affected files, and add input validation/sanitization.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2005-4224 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2005-4224 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data