WordPressCMS
CVE-2006-3389
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 · uneditedindex.php in WordPress 2.0.3 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information, such as SQL table prefixes, via an invalid paged parameter, which displays the information in an SQL error message. NOTE: this issue has been disputed by a third party who states that the issue does not leak any target-specific information.
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 · moderate confidenceWordPress 2.0.3 index.php contains an information disclosure vulnerability where an invalid paged parameter triggers SQL error messages that expose sensitive database information, specifically SQL table prefixes, to remote attackers.
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
WordPressCMS
= 2.0.3CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/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.
-
Verify WordPress version is 2.0.3Locate the wp-includes/version.php file and read the $wp_version variable, or check the meta tag in the HTML source of any WordPress pageAffected if The version reported is exactly 2.0.3
-
Confirm index.php is present and accessibleCheck that the main index.php file exists in the WordPress root directory and is being served by the web serverAffected if index.php exists and handles requests at the site root
-
Test for SQL error disclosure via paged parameterSend a request to index.php with an invalid paged parameter value (for example: ?paged=invalid or ?paged=99999999999999999999) and observe if SQL error messages are returned in the responseAffected if The page returns SQL error messages containing database table names or prefixes
-
Check if error display is enabled in configurationExamine wp-config.php for WP_DEBUG setting or check if display_errors is enabled in PHP configurationAffected if Debug or error display is enabled (this amplifies the disclosure but the vulnerability can still leak errors in version 2.0.3)
A system is affected if it is running WordPress version 2.0.3 and responds to invalid paged parameter requests with SQL error messages that expose database table prefixes.
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 WordPress from the vulnerable 2.0.3 version to a current supported release to eliminate SQL error message leakage and prevent information disclosure.
Fix this in WordPress
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-3389 — 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-2006-3389 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