CVE-2006-5130
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 cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in ph03y3nk just another flat file (JAF) CMS 4.0 RC1 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) name, (2) url, (3) title, and (4) about parameters in a forum post. NOTE: the provenance of this information is unknown; the details are obtained from third party 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 confidenceMultiple stored XSS vulnerabilities in ph03y3nk JAF CMS 4.0 RC1 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript/HTML via the name, url, title, and about parameters in forum posts. The application fails to sanitize user input before rendering it in web pages.
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= 4.0CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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 JAF CMS installation and versionInspect the application banner, footer, or admin panel to identify if Salims Softhouse Jaf CMS is installed and verify the version is exactly 4.0Affected if The installed version is JAF CMS 4.0 RC1 or 4.0
-
Verify forum module is enabledAccess the forum section of the web application and confirm that users can create new posts or repliesAffected if The forum feature is active and accessible to users
-
Test for XSS in forum name parameterSubmit a forum post with a JavaScript payload in the name field (e.g., <script>alert(1)</script>) and then view the post or have another user view it to see if the script executesAffected if The name field accepts and displays unsanitized HTML/JavaScript without encoding
-
Test for XSS in forum url parameterSubmit a forum post with a JavaScript payload in the url field and view the post to check for executionAffected if The url field accepts and displays unsanitized HTML/JavaScript without encoding
-
Test for XSS in forum title parameterSubmit a forum post with a JavaScript payload in the title field and view the post to check for executionAffected if The title field accepts and displays unsanitized HTML/JavaScript without encoding
-
Test for XSS in forum about parameterSubmit a forum post with a JavaScript payload in the about field and view the post to check for executionAffected if The about field accepts and displays unsanitized HTML/JavaScript without encoding
A user is affected if they are running JAF CMS version 4.0 with the forum module enabled and user-supplied input in name, url, title, or about fields is rendered without sanitization or encoding.
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 dataImplement input validation and context-aware output encoding for all user-supplied data in forum posts. Consider deploying a web application firewall as an interim control.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-5130 — 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-2006-5130 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