CVE-2023-6428
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 has been discovered in BigProf Online Invoicing System 2.6, which does not sufficiently encode user-controlled input, resulting in persistent XSS through /invoicing/app/items_view.php, in the FirstRecord parameter. Exploitation of this vulnerability could allow an attacking user to store dangerous JavaScript payloads on the system that will be triggered when the page loads.
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 confidenceStored XSS vulnerability in BigProf Online Invoicing System 2.6 at /invoicing/app/items_view.php. The FirstRecord parameter does not properly encode user input, allowing injection of malicious JavaScript that persists and executes when other users load the page.
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= 2.6CVSS 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.
-
Confirm BigProf Online Invoicing System is installedCheck if the /invoicing/app/ directory exists on the web server and contains items_view.phpAffected if The application directory and items_view.php file exist on the system
-
Identify the installed versionLocate the version file or header within the BigProf Online Invoicing System installation (often in a README, version.php, or admin panel)Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.6
-
Verify the FirstRecord parameter is accessibleAccess the items_view.php page via HTTP/HTTPS request and confirm the FirstRecord parameter is accepted as inputAffected if The page loads and accepts the FirstRecord parameter without sanitization errors
-
Inspect for injected XSS payloads in stored dataReview the database tables (particularly those backing the items_view.php page) for any suspicious script tags, javascript: URIs, or event handler attributes in fields that populate the FirstRecord displayAffected if Any stored XSS payloads are found in the database related to this parameter
The system is affected if BigProf Online Invoicing System version 2.6 is installed and the items_view.php with the FirstRecord parameter is accessible and accepts unsanitized input or contains stored malicious scripts.
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 FirstRecord parameter in items_view.php. Additionally, deploy Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to mitigate XSS execution.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-6428 — 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-2023-6428 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