CVE-2023-30204
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 · uneditedJudging Management System v1.0 was discovered to contain a SQL injection vulnerability via the judge_id parameter at /php-jms/edit_judge.php.
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 confidenceJudging Management System v1.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection via the judge_id parameter in /php-jms/edit_judge.php. An attacker can inject malicious SQL statements through this parameter to manipulate database queries, potentially extracting sensitive data, modifying records, or gaining unauthorized access to the system.
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.
-
Confirm Judging Management System is deployedLocate the application installation directory and check for the presence of php-jms folder and edit_judge.php file. If web-accessible, verify the application responds at the expected URL path.Affected if The application root contains /php-jms/ directory with edit_judge.php present and accessible.
-
Identify the installed versionCheck for version information in the application source files, such as version.php, README, or any configuration files in the Judging Management System root directory.Affected if The application version is 1.0 (or if version cannot be determined and the vulnerable file exists).
-
Verify the vulnerable parameter is in useExamine the edit_judge.php file source code to confirm the judge_id parameter is processed and used in SQL queries without parameterized queries or proper input sanitization.Affected if The file contains SQL queries using judge_id directly from user input (e.g., $_GET or $_POST) without prepared statements or escaping functions.
-
Check application accessibilityDetermine if the edit_judge.php endpoint is exposed via HTTP/HTTPS and reachable by potential attackers.Affected if The vulnerable script is accessible over the network without authentication or with insufficient access controls on the judge_id parameter.
The environment is affected if Judging Management System v1.0 is running with the php-jms/edit_judge.php file accessible and the judge_id parameter handled in SQL queries without prepared statements.
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 involving the judge_id parameter and validate/sanitize all user inputs before using them in SQL queries.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-30204 — 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-2023-30204 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