CVE-2023-3984
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 critical, was found in phpscriptpoint RecipePoint 1.9. This affects an unknown part of the file /recipe-result. The manipulation of the argument text/category/type/difficulty/cuisine/cooking_method leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The identifier VDB-235605 was assigned to this vulnerability.
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 phpscriptpoint RecipePoint 1.9 at the /recipe-result endpoint. Multiple parameters (text, category, type, difficulty, cuisine, cooking_method) are vulnerable to unsanitized SQL input, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands.
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= 1.9CVSS 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 RecipePoint versionLocate and inspect the version file, admin panel about page, or headers/footers of the web application to identify the installed version of RecipePointAffected if Installed version equals 1.9 exactly
-
Verify /recipe-result endpoint existsCheck if the /recipe-result endpoint is accessible on the web server by attempting to access it via HTTP request or reviewing the application's URL routing configurationAffected if The /recipe-result endpoint is present and accessible
-
Identify vulnerable parameter usageReview the application's source code for the recipe-result handler and locate where the parameters text, category, type, difficulty, cuisine, and cooking_method are processedAffected if The application processes one or more of these six parameters through dynamic SQL queries
-
Inspect SQL query implementationExamine the PHP code handling the recipe-result endpoint, specifically looking for SQL query construction that uses these parameters directly in query strings without using prepared statements or parameter bindingAffected if Parameters are concatenated directly into SQL queries without sanitization or parameterized query usage
You are affected if you are running RecipePoint version 1.9 and the /recipe-result endpoint processes the vulnerable parameters (text, category, type, difficulty, cuisine, cooking_method) through unsanitized dynamic SQL queries.
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 queries with parameterized queries/prepared statements for all affected parameters. Apply vendor patch when available. Implement input validation and consider WAF deployment as interim measure.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-3984 — 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-2023-3984 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