CVE-2021-3833
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 · uneditedIntegria IMS login check uses a loose comparator ("==") to compare the MD5 hash of the password provided by the user and the MD5 hash stored in the database. An attacker with a specific formatted password could exploit this vulnerability in order to login in the system with different passwords.
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 confidenceIntegria IMS uses PHP's loose equality operator (==) when comparing the MD5 hash of a user-provided password against the stored hash in the database. This allows authentication bypass via specially crafted passwords that produce MD5 hash collisions (e.g., hashes starting with '0e' followed only by digits, which PHP interprets as the integer 0).
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= 5.0.92CVSS 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:3.1/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 Integria IMS versionAccess the Integria IMS admin interface or check the version file typically located in /var/www/html/integria/ or the installed package version via system package managerAffected if The installed version is 5.0.92 (exact match)
-
Locate authentication handler fileSearch for PHP files handling user login, typically in include/auth.php, include/session.php, or similar authentication-related files within the Integria IMS web rootAffected if The authentication PHP files exist in the expected web directory structure
-
Inspect password comparison logicOpen the identified authentication file and search for MD5 hash comparisons, specifically looking for patterns like 'if (md5($password) == $stored_hash)' or similar loose equality comparisonsAffected if Code contains '==' operator comparing MD5 results directly against stored hashes
-
Verify hash collision vulnerability patternSearch for string comparisons where MD5 output is compared using '==' (loose) rather than '===' (strict), and confirm the code does not use hash_equals() for timing-safe comparisonAffected if MD5 comparisons use loose equality (==) without hash_equals() or strict comparison (===)
You are affected if running Integria IMS version 5.0.92 AND the authentication code uses loose equality operator (==) when comparing MD5 password hashes.
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 dataReplace the loose comparator (==) with strict comparison (===) and use hash_equals() for timing-safe string comparison to prevent type confusion attacks.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $1,936.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-3833 — 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-2021-3833 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