CVE-2017-6485
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 · uneditedA Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) issue was discovered in php-calendar before 2017-03-03. The vulnerability exists due to insufficient filtration of user-supplied data (errorMsg) passed to the "php-calendar-master/error.php" URL. An attacker could execute arbitrary HTML and script code in a browser in the context of the vulnerable website.
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 confidenceA reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in php-calendar's error.php script. The errorMsg parameter is not properly sanitized before being reflected back in the HTTP response, allowing attackers to inject malicious HTML/JavaScript that executes in victim browsers.
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<= 2015-12-04CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/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.
-
Locate php-calendar installationSearch for the php-calendar directory or files on the web server, typically in document root paths like /var/www/html/, /www/, or similar web-accessible directories. Look for a folder named 'php-calendar' or files like 'error.php'.Affected if The php-calendar software is present on the system
-
Identify the installed versionCheck the version information in the php-calendar source code. Look for a version file, README, or within the main PHP files that contain version strings like '2015-12-04' or similar date-based versioning.Affected if The version is dated 2015-12-04 or earlier
-
Verify error.php existsConfirm the existence of the error.php script in the php-calendar installation directory. This file is the affected component that handles error messages.Affected if error.php exists in the php-calendar directory
-
Inspect error.php for unsanitized errorMsg handlingOpen error.php in a text editor or view its source code. Search for the errorMsg parameter handling (typically using $_GET or $_REQUEST). Check if the parameter is passed directly to the response without sanitization functions like htmlspecialchars, ENT_QUOTES, or other output encoding.Affected if The errorMsg parameter is reflected in the HTTP response without proper sanitization using functions like htmlspecialchars with ENT_QUOTES
The system is affected if php-calendar version 2015-12-04 or earlier is installed and the error.php script reflects the errorMsg parameter without proper output encoding.
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 dataApply output encoding (e.g., htmlspecialchars with ENT_QUOTES) to the errorMsg parameter before reflecting it in the response. Implement input validation to reject unexpected characters.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6485 — 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-2017-6485 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