CVE-2023-3558
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 classified as problematic has been found in GZ Scripts Event Booking Calendar 1.8. Affected is an unknown function of the file /load.php. The manipulation of the argument first_name/second_name/phone/address_1/country leads to cross site scripting. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-233352. NOTE: The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 confidenceA reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in GZ Scripts Event Booking Calendar 1.8 within the /load.php file. Attackers can inject malicious scripts via the first_name, second_name, phone, address_1, and country parameters. The attack can be launched remotely with medium complexity due to the need for user interaction.
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= 1.8CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Verify Event Booking Calendar installationLocate the GZ Scripts Event Booking Calendar on your system. Check web server document roots, application directories, or deployment folders for the presence of the calendar software.Affected if The software is present on the system and accessible via web server.
-
Confirm installed version is 1.8Check version files, about pages, or the source code for the exact version number. Common locations include a version.php file, admin panel, or the load.php file header comments.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.8.
-
Locate the load.php fileFind the load.php file within the Event Booking Calendar installation directory. This is typically in the root or a scripts subfolder of the web application.Affected if The load.php file exists in the installation.
-
Check parameter handling in load.phpInspect the load.php source code to verify it processes the first_name, second_name, phone, address_1, and country parameters. Search for these parameter names in the code.Affected if The file processes any of these parameters without proper sanitization.
You are affected if GZ Scripts Event Booking Calendar version 1.8 is installed and the load.php file handles the first_name, second_name, phone, address_1, or country parameters without input validation.
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 robust input validation and context-aware output encoding for all user-supplied parameters in /load.php. Sanitize special characters and consider deploying a WAF rule as an interim protective measure until the code-level fix is applied.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-3558 — 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-2023-3558 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