CVE-2007-2960
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 directory traversal vulnerabilities in Scallywag 2005-04-25 allow remote attackers to include and execute arbitrary local files via a .. (dot dot) in the skin_name parameter to template.php in (1) skin/dark/, (2) skin/gold/, or (3) skin/original/, a different vector than CVE-2007-2900. NOTE: the provenance of this information is unknown; the details are obtained solely 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 confidenceScallywag 2005-04-25 contains directory traversal vulnerabilities in template.php where the skin_name parameter is not properly validated, allowing attackers to use '..' sequences to traverse directories and include/execute arbitrary local files from the server filesystem.
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= 2005-04-25CVSS 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 Scallywag versionLocate the Scallywag installation and check version files, changelog, or version metadata to confirm the installed version is exactly 2005-04-25Affected if Installed version is 2005-04-25
-
Locate template.phpFind the template.php file within the Scallywag installation directory structure, typically in the main application or includes folderAffected if template.php exists in the installation
-
Verify web accessibilityDetermine if Scallywag is running as a web application and template.php is accessible via HTTP/HTTPS requestsAffected if The application is web-facing and template.php can be reached via URL
-
Inspect skin_name parameter handlingOpen template.php and search for the skin_name parameter usage - look for include, require, or similar functions that use this parameter without proper validationAffected if The code uses the skin_name parameter in file inclusion functions without sanitizing '..' sequences
You are affected if you are running Scallywag version 2005-04-25, the template.php file is web-accessible, and the skin_name parameter is used in file inclusion operations without validating against directory traversal.
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 strict input validation on the skin_name parameter to reject directory traversal sequences ('..') and whitelist only allowed skin directory names, or use basename() to strip path components.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,728.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-2960 — 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-2007-2960 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