CVE-2025-14254
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 · uneditedVitals ESP developed by Galaxy Software Services has a SQL Injection vulnerability, allowing authenticated remote attackers to inject arbitrary SQL commands to read database contents.
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 confidenceVitals ESP, a web application developed by Galaxy Software Services, contains a SQL Injection vulnerability in its database query handling. Authenticated remote attackers can inject arbitrary SQL commands through unsanitized input parameters, allowing them to read sensitive database contents. The vulnerability stems from improper input validation or lack of parameterized queries in the application's data access layer.
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<= 6.3CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Verify Vitals ESP versionLocate the Vitals ESP installation and identify its version number, typically found in the application metadata, about page, version file, or software inventory. Compare your installed version against the affected range (versions <= 6.3)Affected if Your installed version of Gss Vitalsesp is 6.3 or lower
-
Confirm web application exposureDetermine if the Vitals ESP web interface is network-accessible. Check firewall rules, reverse proxy configurations, or networkACLs that govern access to the application portAffected if The Vitals ESP web application is accessible from network segments where untrusted users could obtain authentication credentials
-
Identify accessible authentication endpointsReview the application's login and authentication pages that handle user credentials. Note which endpoints accept user input for authentication purposesAffected if The application allows remote authentication with user-supplied credentials through web forms or APIs
-
Check database interaction pointsExamine the application's data access layer or review accessible application logs for database query patterns. Look for parameters or input fields that are used directly in SQL queries without apparent sanitizationAffected if User-supplied input parameters in the application are processed and used in database queries without parameterized query handling
You are affected if you run Gss Vitalsesp version 6.3 or lower and the web application is accessible to authenticated remote users who can supply input to database query functions.
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 parameterized queries or prepared statements for all database interactions, apply strict input validation and sanitization on user-supplied data, and enforce least-privilege database accounts to limit the impact of successful injection attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-14254 — 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-2025-14254 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