WordPressCMS
CVE-2007-4154
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 · uneditedSQL injection vulnerability in options.php in WordPress 2.2.1 allows remote authenticated administrators to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the page_options parameter to (1) options-general.php, (2) options-writing.php, (3) options-reading.php, (4) options-discussion.php, (5) options-privacy.php, (6) options-permalink.php, (7) options-misc.php, and possibly other unspecified components.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in WordPress 2.2.1's options.php allows remote authenticated administrators to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the page_options parameter passed to multiple options pages (options-general.php, options-writing.php, options-reading.php, options-discussion.php, options-privacy.php, options-permalink.php, options-misc.php). The vulnerability requires administrator-level authentication, giving attackers with admin credentials the ability to manipulate database queries.
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
WordPressCMS
= 2.2.1CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/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.
-
Determine installed WordPress versionAccess your WordPress admin dashboard and navigate to Dashboard > Updates, or inspect the wp-includes/version.php file to read the $wp_version variableAffected if The installed version is exactly 2.2.1
-
Locate the vulnerable options.php fileCheck if the file /wp-admin/options.php exists in your WordPress installation directoryAffected if The file exists and the WordPress version is 2.2.1
-
Verify administrator accounts existCheck your WordPress user database table (wp_users) for accounts with user_level 10 or administrator role capabilityAffected if Administrator-level accounts exist in the system
-
Confirm the affected options pages are accessibleVerify that the admin options pages (options-general.php, options-writing.php, options-reading.php, options-discussion.php, options-privacy.php, options-permalink.php, options-misc.php) are present in the /wp-admin/ directoryAffected if These files exist and WordPress version is 2.2.1
A user is affected if their WordPress installation is exactly version 2.2.1 and contains administrator accounts that could potentially exploit the SQL injection in options.php.
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 WordPress to a patched version beyond 2.2.1. Additionally, apply the principle of least privilege by limiting administrator accounts and monitoring admin actions for suspicious activity.
Fix this in WordPress
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-4154 — 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-2007-4154 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