CVE-2006-6168
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 · uneditedtiki-register.php in TikiWiki before 1.9.7 allows remote attackers to trigger "notification-spam" via certain vectors such as a comma-separated list of addresses in the email field, related to lack of "a minimal check on email."
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 confidencetiki-register.php in TikiWiki before 1.9.7 lacks proper email validation, allowing remote attackers to inject a comma-separated list of email addresses in the registration form. This triggers notification-spam to all injected addresses since the application processes each address in the list without validation.
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<= 1.9.6= 1.6.1= 1.9.0= 1.9.1= 1.9.2= 1.9.3= 1.9.4= 1.9.5CVSS 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
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/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.
-
Identify TikiWiki installation and versionCheck for the presence of tiki-register.php in the web root or doc root. Look for a version file or admin panel that displays the installed TikiWiki version.Affected if The installed TikiWiki version is 1.9.6 or earlier, or specifically 1.6.1, 1.9.0, 1.9.1, 1.9.2, 1.9.3, 1.9.4, or 1.9.5.
-
Locate the vulnerable registration scriptSearch the web server document root for tiki-register.php and confirm its path.Affected if The file tiki-register.php exists in the TikiWiki installation directory.
-
Verify user registration is enabledCheck TikiWiki admin settings (tiki-admin.php or similar) to confirm that the user registration feature is enabled for public users.Affected if User self-registration is enabled, allowing unauthenticated access to the registration form.
-
Inspect email validation in tiki-register.phpOpen tiki-register.php and examine the email input handling code. Look for absence of validation functions like filter_var() with FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL or regex checks that properly validate email format.Affected if The code accepts email input without proper validation, or lacks checks to prevent comma-separated email addresses.
A user is affected if they run TikiWiki version 1.9.6 or earlier with the tiki-register.php file present and user registration enabled, where the email field lacks proper validation to block comma-separated addresses.
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 to TikiWiki 1.9.7 or later which includes proper email validation. If immediate patching is not possible, implement server-side email format validation (e.g., using PHP filter_var() with FILTER_VALIDATE_EMAIL) on the email field in tiki-register.php.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2006-6168 — 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-2006-6168 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