CVE-2021-22856
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 CGE property management system contains SQL Injection vulnerabilities. Remote attackers can inject SQL commands into the parameters in Cookie and obtain data in the database without privilege.
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 confidenceThe CGE property management system contains SQL Injection vulnerabilities allowing remote attackers to inject malicious SQL commands through Cookie parameters. Unauthenticated attackers can exploit these injection points to bypass authentication and exfiltrate sensitive data from the underlying database.
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= 1.00CVSS 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:3.1/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 if Changjia Property Management System is deployedLook for web applications serving content related to 'property management' or check web server logs for references to 'Changjia' or 'Changjia Property Management System'. Review installed web applications on the server.Affected if The system is running Changjia Property Management System software.
-
Verify the installed versionCheck the application version information through the web interface, application's about page, or version file in the web root. Compare against the affected version: 1.00.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.00.
-
Identify Cookie parameter handlingReview the application's source code or proxy traffic through the application to inspect how Cookie headers are processed. Look for database query operations that incorporate Cookie values directly without using parameterized queries.Affected if Cookie parameters are used in SQL queries without parameterized statements or input sanitization.
-
Test for SQL injection in Cookie parametersSend HTTP requests with malicious SQL payloads in Cookie headers (e.g., Cookie: id=1' OR '1'='1) and observe database error messages or abnormal application behavior indicating SQL injection vulnerability.Affected if The application exhibits SQL injection symptoms such as database errors or returns unexpected data when SQL metacharacters are included in Cookie values.
A system is affected if it runs Changjia Property Management System version 1.00 and processes Cookie parameters in unsafe SQL queries.
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 parameterized queries (prepared statements) for all database operations, especially those involving Cookie parameters. Apply input validation and sanitization on all user-controlled inputs, and consider deploying a Web Application Firewall (WAF) as an additional defense layer.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-22856 — 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-2021-22856 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