CVE-2019-5715
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 · uneditedAll versions of SilverStripe 3 prior to 3.6.7 and 3.7.3, and all versions of SilverStripe 4 prior to 4.0.7, 4.1.5, 4.2.4, and 4.3.1 allows Reflected SQL Injection through Form and DataObject.
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 SQL injection vulnerability exists in SilverStripe CMS forms and DataObject handling across versions 3.x prior to 3.6.7/3.7.3 and 4.x prior to 4.0.7/4.1.5/4.2.4/4.3.1. Attackers can inject malicious SQL queries through form parameters without authentication.
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>= 3.0.0, < 3.6.7>= 3.7.0, < 3.7.3>= 4.0.0, < 4.0.7>= 4.1.0, < 4.1.5>= 4.2.0, < 4.2.4= 4.3.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 SilverStripe versionLocate the composer.json file in your SilverStripe installation root and check the 'silverstripe/framework' or 'silverstripe/cms' version entry. Alternatively, check for a version file or use the CMS admin interface version display if accessible.Affected if The installed version falls within these vulnerable ranges: 3.0.0 to 3.6.6, 3.7.0 to 3.7.2, 4.0.0 to 4.0.6, 4.1.0 to 4.1.4, 4.2.0 to 4.2.3, or exactly 4.3.0.
-
Confirm form handling is in useSearch your codebase for form-related PHP classes that extend SilverStripe\Forms\Form or handle DataObject operations. Look for instances of Form, FormField, or DataObject::get calls that process user input.Affected if Your application uses SilverStripe forms or DataObject query handling to process user-submitted parameters.
-
Check for unauthenticated form endpointsReview your routing configuration (usually in mysite/_config.php or app/_config.php) and identify any routes that expose form actions without requiring authentication. Look for FormAction handlers that process request parameters directly.Affected if Public-facing forms accept and process parameters without authentication filters applied.
-
Verify parameter handling in DataObject queriesExamine any code that passes request parameters (from $request->getVar or similar) directly into DataObject::get filters or where clauses. Look for patterns like DataObject::get()->filter('param', $request->getVar('value')).Affected if Request parameters are passed directly into database queries without explicit sanitization.
You are affected if your SilverStripe version is below 3.6.7, 3.7.3, 4.0.7, 4.1.5, 4.2.4, or 4.3.1 AND your application exposes form endpoints or DataObject queries that handle unauthenticated user input.
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.
dbcve · scoped3.6.73.7.34.0.7
Upgrade SilverStripe to version 3.6.7+, 3.7.3+, 4.0.7+, 4.1.5+, 4.2.4+, or 4.3.1+ to receive the patched code that properly sanitizes form and DataObject inputs.
Upgrade to the latest patch release in your current minor branch: 3.6.7, 3.7.3, 4.0.7, 4.1.5, 4.2.4, or 4.3.1 depending on your current version
- 1. Backup the entire SilverStripe installation including the database before proceeding with any upgrade
- 2. Identify the current SilverStripe version by checking the sapphiresession file or composer.json
- 3. For SilverStripe 3.x installations: If running 3.6.x, upgrade to 3.6.7; if running 3.7.x, upgrade to 3.7.3
- 4. For SilverStripe 4.x installations: If running 4.0.x, upgrade to 4.0.7; if running 4.1.x, upgrade to 4.1.5; if running 4.2.x, upgrade to 4.2.4; if running 4.3.x, upgrade to 4.3.1
- 5. Run composer update to apply the changes
- 6. Run /dev/build to rebuild the database schema
- 7. Clear all caches (remove silverstripe-cache directory and any cache folders)
- 8. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version number in the CMS admin panel
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-5715 — 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-2019-5715 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