Azucar CmsApplication

CVE-2008-0654

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v2.0 Published 2008-02-07
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Multiple directory traversal vulnerabilities in Azucar CMS 1.3 allow remote attackers to include and execute arbitrary local files via a .. (dot dot) in the _VIEW (view) parameter to (1) index.php, (2) html/sitio/index.php, or (3) src/sistema/vistas/template/tpl_inicio.php.

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 confidence

Azucar CMS 1.3 contains multiple directory traversal vulnerabilities allowing remote attackers to inject '../' sequences into the _VIEW or view parameters in index.php and two additional PHP files. This enables local file inclusion (LFI), potentially exposing sensitive system files such as /etc/passwd or configuration files containing credentials.

MitigationImplement strict input validation to reject any user-supplied parameter containing '..' or directory traversal sequences. Use allowlists for permitted view templates and disable PHP's allow_url_include. Consider migrating to a modern framework with built-in input sanitization.

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
Azucar CmsApplication
Affected:= 1.3

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm Azucar CMS version
    Locate and inspect any version file, footer, or admin panel that displays the installed CMS version. Check common locations like /admin/, /about.php, or the main index.php source for version strings.
    Affected if The installed version is Azucar CMS 1.3 exactly
  2. Identify vulnerable PHP scripts
    Locate index.php and search for code that handles the '_VIEW' or 'view' parameters. Identify the two additional PHP files that also accept these parameters by reviewing index.php's include/require statements.
    Affected if index.php or additional PHP files process the _VIEW/view parameters without sanitizing '../' sequences
  3. Test parameter injection capability
    Submit a request to index.php with a view parameter containing '../' sequences, such as 'view=../etc/passwd' or using the _VIEW parameter. Observe if the application returns file contents from outside the web root.
    Affected if The application returns content from files outside the intended views directory, confirming LFI is possible
  4. Check input validation logic
    Review the source code of index.php and the two vulnerable files to determine if they validate or restrict the view parameter to an allowed list of templates.
    Affected if No validation exists that blocks directory traversal sequences ('..') in the view parameters

A user is affected if they are running Azucar CMS version 1.3 and the application exposes the vulnerable _VIEW or view parameters without filtering '../' sequences, allowing unauthenticated remote file inclusion.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict input validation to reject any user-supplied parameter containing '..' or directory traversal sequences. Use allowlists for permitted view templates and disable PHP's allow_url_include. Consider migrating to a modern framework with built-in input sanitization.

Fix this in Azucar Cms Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-0654 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-0654 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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