CVE-2025-10624
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 security flaw has been discovered in PHPGurukul User Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /login.php. Performing manipulation of the argument emailid results in sql injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in PHPGurukul User Management System 1.0's login.php file allows remote attackers to inject malicious SQL queries through the emailid parameter. The CVSS 9.8 score indicates this is exploitable without authentication and can lead to complete compromise of the application's database.
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 PHPGurukul User Management System is installedLocate the application's web directory and verify the presence of the User Management System by examining typical PHP application files such as index.php, login.php, or configuration files that reference the product name.Affected if The application directory contains the PHPGurukul User Management System files.
-
Verify the installed version is 1.0Check for a version file, readme, or any file containing the version string '1.0' within the application root directory. Compare the found version against the affected range.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.0.
-
Locate the vulnerable login.php fileSearch for the login.php file within the application's web-accessible directories.Affected if The login.php file exists in the application.
-
Examine the emailid parameter handling in login.phpOpen login.php and inspect the code that handles the emailid POST or GET parameter. Look for SQL queries that incorporate this parameter directly without using prepared statements or parameterized queries.Affected if The emailid parameter is used in a SQL query without prepared statement binding (for example, direct string concatenation or interpolation into the query).
You are affected if the PHPGurukul User Management System version 1.0 is installed and login.php contains unsanitized SQL query construction using the emailid parameter.
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) in login.php for the emailid parameter, implement strict input validation, and apply vendor patches if available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-10624 — 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-2025-10624 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