CVE-2017-1000129
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 · uneditedSerendipity 2.0.3 is vulnerable to a SQL injection in the blog component resulting in information disclosure
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Serendipity 2.0.3's blog component allows attackers to inject malicious SQL queries through unsanitized input, potentially exposing sensitive database information such as user credentials, blog content, or configuration data.
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= 2.0.3CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Identify Serendipity versionLocate the Serendipity installation directory and check the version file (typically includes a version.php, CHANGELOG, or serendipity_version_file). Common paths include /serendipity/ or the web root if installed directly.Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.0.3. Note that only this specific version (= 2.0.3) is affected; other versions in the 2.x series may not be vulnerable.
-
Confirm blog component is activeCheck if the Serendipity blog component is installed and accessible on the web server. This may involve verifying the presence of blog-related files in the web directory or checking that the blog URL path responds.Affected if The blog component is installed and publicly accessible. The SQL injection targets unsanitized input within this component.
-
Review web server and application logsExamine web server access logs (Apache access_log, Nginx access.log) and Serendipity's own logs for unusual SQL syntax in request parameters that might indicate exploitation attempts.Affected if Log entries show SQL injection patterns in parameters submitted to blog component URLs, such as UNION SELECT, OR 1=1, or other SQL keywords in query parameters.
-
Check for unexpected database queries or data exposureReview database logs or monitoring tools for suspicious queries originating from the web application that retrieve user credentials, configuration tables, or other sensitive data.Affected if Database shows queries that appear to be injected SQL (unusual UNION clauses, queries against user tables with unexpected conditions) originating from the web application.
You are affected only if Serendipity version 2.0.3 is installed AND the blog component is accessible and processing user input without sanitization.
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 the latest Serendipity version or apply the vendor-released patch that addresses input sanitization in the blog component. Consider using parameterized queries for all database interactions.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1000129 — 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-2017-1000129 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