CVE-2015-6007
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Web Reference Database (aka refbase) through 0.9.6 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users.
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 · moderate confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Web Reference Database (refbase) versions through 0.9.6 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users by tricking authenticated users into submitting malicious crafted requests to the application.
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<= 0.9.6CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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 installed refbase versionCheck the version file or footer of the web interface for the refbase version number. Common locations include a version.php file, a config file, or the main page footer.Affected if The installed version is 0.9.6 or lower.
-
Inspect login and state-changing forms for anti-CSRF tokensView the HTML source of forms that perform actions (login, add/modify/delete records, user settings). Look for hidden input fields containing token values or check if forms include anti-CSRF token parameters.Affected if Forms lack hidden CSRF token fields or token parameters.
-
Verify session cookie configurationExamine the session cookie settings via browser developer tools (Application tab) or by inspecting HTTP headers. Check if the session cookie has SameSite=Strict or SameSite=Lax attributes configured.Affected if SameSite attribute is missing or set to None, or cookies lack the Secure flag.
-
Check server-side token validationIf source code is accessible, search for CSRF token validation logic in form handling scripts (e.g., check for token verification functions, token comparison with session data).Affected if No server-side validation of CSRF tokens is found in form processing code.
You are affected if running refbase version 0.9.6 or lower and any of the forms handling sensitive operations lack CSRF token protection or session cookies lack SameSite attributes.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations (forms, API endpoints) and validate them server-side, or configure SameSite cookie attributes to prevent cross-site request forgery.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-6007 — 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-2015-6007 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