CVE-2006-2150
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 · uneditedPHP remote file inclusion vulnerability in top/list.php in phpBB TopList 1.3.8 and earlier allows remote attackers to include arbitrary files via the returnpath parameter.
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 confidenceThis is a remote file inclusion (RFI) vulnerability in phpBB TopList 1.3.8 and earlier. The vulnerable file top/list.php does not properly sanitize the returnpath parameter, allowing remote attackers to include arbitrary files from remote servers. This can lead to arbitrary code execution on the affected server.
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= 1.3.8CVSS 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
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N
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 phpBB TopList installationSearch your web server for the presence of a 'toplist' or 'toplist' directory, typically found within the phpBB installation or as a standalone module under the web root.Affected if The directory or files related to phpBB TopList exist on the server.
-
Identify the exact version of phpBB TopListLocate and open the main phpBB TopList file such as top/list.php or any version file within the toplist directory and check the declared version number.Affected if The installed version is 1.3.8 or any version lower than 1.3.8.
-
Verify the vulnerable file existsCheck for the presence of the file 'top/list.php' within the toplist directory on the web server.Affected if The file top/list.php exists and is accessible via the web server.
-
Inspect the returnpath parameter handlingReview the source code of top/list.php and locate the code that handles the 'returnpath' parameter to see if it performs any validation or sanitization before using it in an include or require statement.Affected if The code uses the returnpath parameter in an include, require, or similar function without proper validation, allowing external URLs.
-
Test for RFI accessibilityIf the application is in a non-production environment, attempt a safe test by observing whether the application accepts a remote URL as the returnpath value (e.g., via a web request to top/list.php?returnpath=http://example.com).Affected if The application processes a remote URL in the returnpath parameter, indicating the vulnerability is present and exploitable.
You are affected if phpBB TopList version 1.3.8 or earlier is installed and the top/list.php file handles the returnpath parameter without validating or sanitizing the input.
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 phpBB TopList to a version beyond 1.3.8, or implement strict input validation/sanitization on the returnpath parameter to ensure only expected values are accepted. If exploitation is suspected, conduct a full forensic review for backdoors.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-2150 — 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-2006-2150 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