CVE-2025-11507
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 weakness has been identified in PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System 1.1. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /admin/search-invoices.php. This manipulation of the argument searchdata causes sql injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks.
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 PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System 1.1 allows remote attackers to inject malicious SQL queries via the searchdata parameter in /admin/search-invoices.php. With CVSS 9.8, this critical flaw can lead to unauthorized database access, data exfiltration, or potential system compromise.
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= 1.1CVSS 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 installed product versionLocate and inspect version files or check the admin dashboard for the PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System version. Compare against version 1.1.Affected if The system is running PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System version 1.1.
-
Verify vulnerable file existsCheck if the file /admin/search-invoices.php exists on the web server.Affected if The file search-invoices.php exists in the /admin/ directory.
-
Inspect searchdata parameter handlingReview the source code of /admin/search-invoices.php and locate where the searchdata parameter is used in SQL queries. Look for whether prepared statements or parameterized queries are used.Affected if The searchdata parameter is directly concatenated into SQL queries without sanitization or prepared statements.
-
Confirm admin access is possibleVerify the /admin/ directory is accessible to remote users or that the application permits unauthenticated or low-privileged access to the search-invoices functionality.Affected if The admin panel or search-invoices functionality is accessible to remote attackers.
The environment is affected if PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System 1.1 is installed, the /admin/search-invoices.php file exists, and the searchdata parameter is handled without parameterized 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 dataImplement prepared statements/parameterized queries to properly sanitize the searchdata parameter before executing SQL queries. Validate and sanitize all user inputs, and apply vendor security patches if available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-11507 — 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-2025-11507 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