CVE-2014-6050
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 · uneditedphpMyFAQ before 2.8.13 allows remote attackers to bypass the CAPTCHA protection mechanism by replaying the request.
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 confidencephpMyFAQ before version 2.8.13 contains a CAPTCHA bypass vulnerability where remote attackers can circumvent the CAPTCHA protection mechanism by replaying the same request. This indicates the CAPTCHA validation lacks proper anti-replay protections such as unique tokens, proper session binding, or adequate server-side state validation.
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< 2.8.13CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
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 phpMyFAQ versionLocate the version file or header typically included in the phpMyFAQ installation directory, or check the footer of the admin/login page for the version number.Affected if The installed version is below 2.8.13 (for example, 2.8.12, 2.8.0, 2.7.x, or earlier releases).
-
Identify if CAPTCHA is enabledAccess the phpMyFAQ admin configuration panel and locate the CAPTCHA settings under the security or general settings section. Determine whether CAPTCHA protection is currently active for forms such as login, registration, or contact pages.Affected if CAPTCHA is enabled and the installed version is below 2.8.13.
-
Inspect CAPTCHA session handlingExamine the CAPTCHA implementation code (typically found in directory paths related to security, captcha, or session handling). Look for whether the CAPTCHA validation relies on server-side session state or includes unique token generation per request.Affected if The CAPTCHA code lacks unique tokens per request or proper session binding, allowing the same CAPTCHA value to be reused across multiple submissions.
-
Test CAPTCHA replay vulnerabilitySubmit a valid CAPTCHA response to a protected form, capture the successful request, and attempt to resubmit the identical request multiple times without obtaining a new CAPTCHA challenge.Affected if Repeated submissions of the same CAPTCHA value succeed, indicating the validation does not invalidate the CAPTCHA after first use.
A user is affected if phpMyFAQ version is below 2.8.13 and CAPTCHA protection is enabled, as the lack of anti-replay controls allows bypassing CAPTCHA by replaying the same request.
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 data2.8.13
Upgrade phpMyFAQ to version 2.8.13 or later to obtain the CAPTCHA bypass fix. If immediate upgrading is not feasible, consider disabling affected CAPTCHA-protected forms or implementing additional rate-limiting as a temporary measure.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-6050 — 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-2014-6050 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