JoomlaCMS
CVE-2006-4466
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 · uneditedJoomla! before 1.0.11 does not properly unset variables when the input data includes a numeric parameter with a value matching an alphanumeric parameter's hash value, which allows remote attackers to have an unspecified impact. NOTE: it could be argued that this vulnerability is due to a bug in the unset PHP command (CVE-2006-3017) and the proper fix should be in PHP; if so, then this should not be treated as a vulnerability in Joomla!.
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 confidenceJoomla! before 1.0.11 contained a variable handling flaw where PHP's unset() function failed to properly clear variables when a numeric parameter's value matched an alphanumeric parameter's hash value. This stems from a known PHP unset bug (CVE-2006-3017), allowing remote attackers unspecified impact via this bypass.
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
JoomlaCMS
<= 1.0.10= 1.0.9CVSS 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.
-
Locate Joomla installationFind the Joomla installation directory in the web server document root. Look for the configuration.php file or the /administrator/ directory which are present in Joomla installations.Affected if Unable to locate Joomla files on the system
-
Determine Joomla version numberCheck the version by examining the VERSION.php file in the includes/ directory, or access the administrator login page footer which displays the installed version.Affected if Version is Joomla 1.0.10 or earlier (including 1.0.9, 1.0.8, etc.)
-
Verify 1.0.x branchConfirm the version starts with 1.0.x to identify the legacy branch. Versions 1.0.0 through 1.0.10 inclusive are all in the vulnerable range.Affected if Running any Joomla 1.0.x version at or below 1.0.10
If the installed Joomla version is 1.0.10 or any earlier 1.0.x release, the environment is affected by CVE-2006-4466.
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 Joomla! to version 1.0.11 or later; if running legacy Joomla 1.0.x, strongly consider migrating to a supported Joomla version as 1.0.x has been End of Life for over a decade.
Fix this in Joomla
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-2006-4466 — 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-2006-4466 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