CVE-2025-12294
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 SourceCodester Point of Sales 1.0. Impacted is an unknown function of the file /delete_category.php. Performing manipulation of the argument ID 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 SourceCodester Point of Sales 1.0's /delete_category.php file allows remote attackers to manipulate the ID parameter to inject arbitrary SQL queries. The lack of input sanitization on the ID argument enables attackers to potentially extract, modify, or delete database contents, and potentially achieve remote code execution through database function abuse.
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.
-
Identify the installed application versionLocate the application directory and check version files, headers, or any version identifier within the SourceCodester Point of Sales installation. Compare against version 1.0.Affected if The installed version is Janobe Point Of Sales 1.0
-
Verify the vulnerable file existsCheck for the presence of /delete_category.php in the web root or application directory. Common paths may include /path/to/pos/delete_category.php or similar.Affected if The delete_category.php file exists in the application directory
-
Confirm web accessibility of the affected endpointAttempt to access the delete_category.php file via HTTP/HTTPS request (e.g., GET or POST to the application's URL with the file path).Affected if The file is accessible over the network (returns any HTTP response other than 404)
-
Check if the application uses database connectivityInspect application configuration files or logs to confirm the application connects to a MySQL or MariaDB database.Affected if The application uses a database (the SQL injection requires a database to be present)
A user is affected if they run Janobe Point Of Sales version 1.0 with the delete_category.php file accessible over the network and the application uses a database backend.
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 ID parameter before executing SQL queries, or temporarily disable/delete the affected file until the fix is deployed.
- 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-2025-12294 — 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-2025-12294 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