CVE-2022-3581
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 vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in SourceCodester Cashier Queuing System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the component Cashiers Tab. The manipulation of the argument Name leads to cross site scripting. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-211188.
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 confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in SourceCodester Cashier Queuing System 1.0 allows injection of malicious scripts through the Name parameter in the Cashiers Tab component. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable with user interaction required.
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= 1.0CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/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.
-
Identify if Cashier Queuing System is installedCheck your web server document root or application directory for files related to SourceCodester or Oretnom23 Cashier Queuing System. Look for directories named 'cashier', 'queue', or similar application folders.Affected if The application directory contains SourceCodester or Oretnom23 Cashier Queuing System files
-
Verify the installed version is 1.0Locate any version file, about page, or configuration file within the application that displays the software version. Common locations include a 'version.php', 'about.php', or footer files. Compare your found version against the affected range (1.0).Affected if The application version is exactly 1.0
-
Confirm the Cashiers Tab component is accessibleLog into the application and navigate to the Cashiers Tab or Cashier management section. Verify this component is present and functional in the running application.Affected if The Cashiers Tab component exists and is accessible in the application interface
-
Check if user input is accepted in the Name parameterAccess the form or interface within the Cashiers Tab that accepts Name parameter input. This is typically an Add/Edit Cashier form where the name field can be populated.Affected if There is an input field for Name in the Cashiers Tab that accepts user-supplied values
If the Cashier Queuing System version 1.0 is running with the Cashiers Tab accessible and the Name parameter accepts user input, the environment is affected by this XSS vulnerability.
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 proper input validation and output encoding for the Name parameter in the Cashiers Tab component to neutralize script injection attempts. Consider deploying Content Security Policy headers.
- 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-2022-3581 — 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-2022-3581 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