CVE-2007-0192
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the save_main operation in the ad_perms section in admin.php in MKPortal allows remote attackers to modify privilege settings, as demonstrated using a getURL of admin.php within a .swf file contained in an IFRAME element, aka the "All Guests are Admin" attack.
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 confidenceCSRF vulnerability in MKPortal's admin.php allows remote attackers to modify privilege settings by tricking authenticated administrators into submitting requests via malicious SWF/IFRAME constructs. The save_main operation in the ad_perms section lacks anti-CSRF token validation, enabling privilege escalation (making guests admins).
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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.
-
Confirm MKPortal installationSearch the webroot for mkportal files or directories, or check the footer/source of the website for 'MKPortal' brandingAffected if MKPortal is installed on the server
-
Locate admin.phpFind admin.php within the mkportal installation directory, typically at /admin.php or /admin/admin.phpAffected if admin.php exists in the MKPortal installation
-
Verify ad_perms functionality existsSearch the admin.php source code for 'ad_perms' and 'save_main' strings to confirm the vulnerable section is presentAffected if The ad_perms section with save_main operation is found in admin.php
-
Check for anti-CSRF token validationExamine the save_main operation code within the ad_perms section. Look for token validation functions, session checks, or referer validation before processing privilege modificationsAffected if No anti-CSRF token, session token, or referer validation is found in the save_main operation code
-
Confirm admin access is possibleVerify the web server serves the admin.php and that authentication mechanisms exist but lack CSRF protection for privilege changesAffected if Administrators can authenticate to admin.php and the privilege modification endpoint lacks CSRF protection
If MKPortal is installed and the admin.php ad_perms section lacks anti-CSRF token validation, 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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all admin forms and validate request origin via Referer/Origin headers. Require re-authentication for sensitive privilege modifications.
- 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-2007-0192 — 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-2007-0192 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