CVE-2024-13082
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 was found in PHPGurukul Land Record System 1.0. It has been rated as problematic. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file /admin/search-property.php. The manipulation of the argument Search By leads to cross site scripting. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
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 confidenceA stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in PHPGurukul Land Record System 1.0 at /admin/search-property.php. The 'Search By' parameter does not properly sanitize user input before rendering it back in the page, allowing an attacker to inject malicious JavaScript that executes in the browsers of other users who view the search functionality.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 the PHPGurukul Land Record System versionLocate the installation directory and check for version indicators such as a version file, about page, or footer copyright text that specifies version 1.0Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.0 (the only affected version listed)
-
Verify the vulnerable file existsCheck for the presence of the file search-property.php in the /admin/ directory of the web application rootAffected if The file /admin/search-property.php exists in the webroot
-
Confirm admin access to the search functionalityNavigate to /admin/ and log in to access the admin dashboard, then locate the search-property.php pageAffected if The admin panel is accessible and the search-property.php page is reachable
-
Identify the Search By parameter handlingReview the source code of /admin/search-property.php and locate the form field handling user input for the 'Search By' parameter - look for where this parameter value is echoed back into the HTML output without encodingAffected if The Search By parameter value is returned and displayed in the page output without proper sanitization or output encoding
A user is affected if they are running PHPGurukul Land Record System version 1.0, have the /admin/search-property.php file present, and the Search By parameter on that page reflects user input back into the HTML without sanitization, allowing stored XSS execution.
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 input validation and output encoding for the Search By parameter. Apply context-aware output encoding when displaying any user-supplied data, and consider implementing Content Security Policy headers as defense-in-depth.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-13082 — 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-2024-13082 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