CVE-2008-3333
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 · uneditedDirectory traversal vulnerability in core/lang_api.php in Mantis before 1.1.2 allows remote attackers to include and execute arbitrary files via the language parameter to the user preferences page (account_prefs_update.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 confidenceLocal file inclusion vulnerability in MantisBT before version 1.1.2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by manipulating the language parameter in account_prefs_update.php to traverse directories and include malicious 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<= 1.1.1= 0.9= 0.9.0= 0.9.1= 0.10= 0.10.0= 0.10.1= 0.10.2= 0.11= 0.11.0= 0.11.1= 0.12CVSS 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 MantisBT versionLocate the version file (typically config_version.php or core.php in the MantisBT root directory) or check the admin directory for version information. The version may also be displayed in the footer of the MantisBT web interface.Affected if The installed version is 1.1.1 or earlier, or matches any of these: 0.9, 0.9.0, 0.9.1, 0.10, 0.10.0, 0.10.1, 0.10.2, 0.11, 0.11.0, 0.11.1, or 0.12.
-
Verify account_prefs_update.php existsCheck if the file account_prefs_update.php exists in the MantisBT web root directory. This file handles user preference updates and contains the vulnerable language parameter.Affected if The file exists and is accessible via the web server.
-
Confirm language parameter handlingExamine the account_prefs_update.php source code to see how the language parameter is processed. Look for code that includes or requires files based on user input without proper validation.Affected if The language parameter is used in an include/require statement without sanitizing path traversal sequences (../).
-
Check PHP configurationReview the PHP configuration file (php.ini) for settings that may mitigate or enable this vulnerability, particularly open_basedir restrictions and allow_url_include settings.Affected if open_basedir is not configured or is configured broadly, allowing the attacker to traverse to sensitive directories.
You are affected if your MantisBT installation is version 1.1.1 or earlier, account_prefs_update.php is accessible, and the language parameter accepts path traversal sequences without validation.
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 MantisBT 1.1.2 or later, or implement strict input validation on the language parameter to reject path traversal sequences (e.g., ../) and restrict allowed values to a whitelist of legitimate language files.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-3333 — 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-2008-3333 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