CVE-2006-3798
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 · uneditedDeluxeBB 1.07 and earlier allows remote attackers to overwrite the (1) _GET, (2) _POST, (3) _ENV, and (4) _SERVER variables via the _COOKIE (aka COOKIE) variable, which can overwrite the other variables during an extract function call, probably leading to multiple security vulnerabilities, aka "pollution of the global namespace."
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 confidenceDeluxeBB 1.07 and earlier uses PHP's extract() function without safe flags, allowing attacker-controlled COOKIE variables to overwrite superglobals (_GET, _POST, _ENV, _SERVER). This global namespace pollution enables attackers to inject arbitrary values into trusted superglobals, bypassing security controls that rely on them.
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= 1.05= 1.06= 1.07CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/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 DeluxeBB installationSearch for DeluxeBB files in your web root directory. Look for directories containing 'deluxebb' or 'deluxe bb' names, or files with deluxebb branding.Affected if DeluxeBB software is found on the system
-
Identify installed versionCheck for a version file or header in DeluxeBB source code. Common locations include a version.php file, footer files, or an admin panel showing version information. Compare the version number to 1.05, 1.06, and 1.07.Affected if Installed version is 1.05, 1.06, or 1.07
-
Locate extract() usage in source codeSearch PHP source files for extract( function calls. Use grep or a file search to find 'extract(' patterns in DeluxeBB PHP files, particularly in files that handle COOKIE data or request variables.Affected if extract() calls are found without EXTR_SKIP or EXTR_PREFIX_ALL flags
-
Verify COOKIE variable handlingExamine files containing extract() to determine if COOKIE data ($_COOKIE) is passed to the extract() function. Look for patterns like extract($_COOKIE) or extract($HTTP_COOKIE_VARS).Affected if COOKIE variables are passed directly to extract() without sanitization
-
Check superglobal overwrite potentialReview the extract() call context to confirm the extraction import directory includes _GET, _POST, _ENV, _SERVER. Look for extract($_REQUEST) or extract() with default behavior that allows overwriting existing variables.Affected if extract() is used in a way that can overwrite superglobal variables
If DeluxeBB version 1.05, 1.06, or 1.07 is installed and the codebase contains extract() calls processing COOKIE data without safe flags, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataReplace unsafe extract() calls with explicit variable assignment or use safe extract() flags (EXTR_SKIP, EXTR_PREFIX_ALL). Audit code that trusts superglobal values after extraction.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-3798 — 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-2006-3798 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