MoodleCMS
CVE-2012-3395
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 mod/feedback/complete.php in Moodle 2.0.x before 2.0.10, 2.1.x before 2.1.7, and 2.2.x before 2.2.4 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via crafted form data.
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 Moodle's feedback module (mod/feedback/complete.php) allows authenticated remote users to execute arbitrary SQL commands via crafted form data. User-supplied input in the feedback completion form is not properly sanitized before being used in 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
MoodleCMS
= 2.0.0= 2.0.1= 2.0.2= 2.0.3= 2.0.4= 2.0.5= 2.0.6= 2.0.7= 2.0.8= 2.0.9= 2.1.0= 2.1.1CVSS 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 Moodle versionAccess the admin page or check version.php in the Moodle root directory (usually at /lib/version.php). Look for the $release or $version variable.Affected if The installed version is 2.0.0 through 2.0.9, or 2.1.0 through 2.1.1 (exact matches as listed in affected versions).
-
Verify feedback module is presentCheck if the mod/feedback directory exists in the Moodle installation. Navigate to Site Administration > Plugins > Activity modules > Feedback to confirm the module is installed.Affected if The feedback module is installed and accessible on the site.
-
Confirm feedback module is enabledIn Moodle admin interface, go to Site Administration > Plugins > Activity modules > Feedback and verify the module is set to 'Enabled'. Alternatively, query the mdl_config_plugins table where plugin='feedback' and name='visible'Affected if The feedback module is enabled and accessible to users.
-
Check for authenticated user access to feedback activitiesReview existing feedback activities in courses and verify that non-admin users have the capability to complete feedback forms. Check course enrollment and feedback activity access permissions.Affected if Authenticated users (students, teachers, or other enrolled users) can access and submit feedback forms.
A user is affected if their Moodle version matches 2.0.0-2.0.9 or 2.1.0-2.1.1 AND the feedback module is installed, enabled, and accessible to authenticated users.
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 Moodle to version 2.0.10, 2.1.7, or 2.2.4 or later to patch the SQL injection vulnerability. As a temporary measure, disable the feedback module if upgrade is not immediately possible.
Fix this in Moodle
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-3395 — 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-2012-3395 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