CVE-2022-36787
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 · uneditedwebvendome - webvendome SQL Injection. SQL Injection in the Parameter " DocNumber" Request : Get Request : /webvendome/showfiles.aspx?jobnumber=nullDoc Number=HERE.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in webvendome's showfiles.aspx allows unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary SQL commands via the DocNumber GET parameter. The vulnerable endpoint constructs database queries without proper input sanitization or parameterized statements, enabling complete database compromise.
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
- 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.
-
Verify Webvendome version 1.0 is deployedLocate the web application installation directory and check version information (version.txt, assembly info, or application metadata). Compare your installed version against the affected version (1.0).Affected if Webvendome version 1.0 is installed and running
-
Confirm showfiles.aspx existsSearch the web root directory for the showfiles.aspx file. This is the vulnerable endpoint.Affected if showfiles.aspx file is present in the application web directory
-
Identify if DocNumber parameter is processedReview the showfiles.aspx code-behind (C#, VB.NET, or equivalent) to locate the handling of the DocNumber GET parameter. Check if this parameter is used directly in SQL query construction without sanitization or parameterized queries.Affected if The DocNumber parameter is used in dynamic SQL string concatenation without prepared statements or input validation
-
Test for unauthenticated SQL injectionSend a crafted GET request to showfiles.aspx with a test payload in the DocNumber parameter (e.g., DocNumber=1' OR '1'='1). Observe application response for SQL error messages or unexpected behavior indicating unsanitized input execution.Affected if The application returns SQL database errors or exhibits different behavior when SQL syntax is injected into the DocNumber parameter without authentication
You are affected if Webvendome version 1.0 is running and showfiles.aspx processes the DocNumber parameter without parameterized queries, allowing SQL injection without authentication.
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 dynamic SQL query construction with parameterized queries/prepared statements for the DocNumber parameter. Apply input validation and ensure the application uses least-privilege database accounts.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-36787 — 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-2022-36787 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