CVE-2021-41074
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 CSRF issue in index.php in QloApps hotel eCommerce 1.5.1 allows an attacker to change the admin's email address via a crafted HTML document.
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 confidenceThis is a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the index.php file of QloApps hotel eCommerce 1.5.1. The application lacks proper anti-CSRF tokens on the admin email change functionality, allowing an authenticated administrator to unknowingly trigger a malicious request that changes their email address when visiting a crafted HTML document hosted by an attacker.
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= 1.5.1CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/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.
-
Confirm QloApps versionLocate the version number in your QloApps installation (typically in the admin dashboard under System Information, or in a version/config file in the installation directory)Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.5.1
-
Inspect admin email change form sourceNavigate to the admin email change functionality in the application, view the page source or HTML form in index.php, and examine whether a CSRF token or anti-CSRF mechanism is present in the form fieldsAffected if No CSRF token field (such as a hidden input with a random value or a token parameter) is present in the admin email change form
-
Verify server-side CSRF validationExamine the PHP code in index.php that handles the admin email change POST request and check whether it validates a CSRF token before processing the email modificationAffected if The server-side code does not validate or verify any CSRF token when processing the admin email change request
-
Check other admin forms for CSRF protectionReview other state-changing admin forms in index.php to determine if a consistent CSRF protection pattern (synchronizer tokens) is applied across the applicationAffected if Other admin forms also lack CSRF token validation, indicating a systemic CSRF protection gap
You are affected if running QloApps version 1.5.1 and the admin email change form in index.php lacks anti-CSRF tokens both in the client-side form and server-side validation logic.
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 anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing admin forms including email modification, and validate these tokens server-side before processing any administrative actions.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-41074 — 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-2021-41074 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