CVE-2018-16651
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 · uneditedThe admin backend in phpMyFAQ before 2.9.11 allows CSV injection in reports.
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 confidenceThe admin backend in phpMyFAQ before 2.9.11 is vulnerable to CSV injection (formula injection) in the reports feature. User-supplied or retrieved data exported to CSV files is not properly sanitized, allowing injection of spreadsheet formulas (starting with =, +, -, @, tab) that can execute commands or exfiltrate data when the CSV is opened in spreadsheet software.
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< 2.9.11CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 phpMyFAQ versionCheck the admin dashboard footer, the main index page, or the configuration file for the installed phpMyFAQ version numberAffected if The version displayed is below 2.9.11 (for example, 2.9.10, 2.9.9, or earlier)
-
Verify reports feature is accessibleLog into the phpMyFAQ admin panel and navigate to the Reports section (usually under Statistics or Reports menu). Confirm the feature is enabled and accessibleAffected if The reports feature exists and is accessible to admin users in the installed version
-
Check CSV export capability in reportsIn the admin panel reports section, locate the export options and verify if CSV export functionality is presentAffected if CSV export option is available in the reports feature
-
Audit for existing CSV filesSearch the server filesystem for CSV files in the phpMyFAQ data directory or any configured export folder. Review web server logs for requests to export.php or similar CSV export endpointsAffected if CSV files exist that were generated by phpMyFAQ reports, or export requests are logged in the web server access logs
You are affected if phpMyFAQ version is below 2.9.11 AND the reports feature with CSV export has been used to generate CSV files from user-supplied or retrieved data.
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 data2.9.11
Update phpMyFAQ to version 2.9.11 or later. As a compensating control, implement output encoding for CSV exports by prefixing formula characters with a single quote or removing/replacing characters like =, +, -, @, %, and control characters in data before CSV export.
- 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-2018-16651 — 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-2018-16651 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