CVE-2025-60641
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 · uneditedThe file mexcel.php in the Vfront 0.99.52 codebase contains a vulnerable call to unserialize(base64_decode($_POST['mexcel'])), where $_POST['mexcel'] is user-controlled input. This input is decoded from base64 and deserialized without validation or use of the allowed_classes option, allowing an attacker to inject arbitrary PHP objects. This can lead to malicious behavior, such as Remote Code Execution (RCE), SQL Injection, Path Traversal, or Denial of Service, depending on the availability of exploitable classes in the Vfront codebase or its dependencies.
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 confidenceVfront 0.99.52 contains a PHP Object Injection vulnerability in mexcel.php where $_POST['mexcel'] is base64 decoded and passed to unserialize() without validation or use of the allowed_classes whitelist. This allows attackers to inject arbitrary PHP objects by crafting malicious serialized payloads, potentially achieving RCE if exploitable classes exist in the application or its dependencies.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm Vfront installation and versionLocate Vfront installation files (e.g., in web server document root). Check for version file or header in index.php, README, or version.php. Compare the installed version to 0.99.52.Affected if Vfront version 0.99.52 is installed and exposed to the network.
-
Verify mexcel.php exists in webrootSearch for the file mexcel.php within the Vfront web directory. Common paths: /mexcel.php, /inc/mexcel.php, or /functions/mexcel.php.Affected if The mexcel.php file exists in the accessible web directory.
-
Inspect mexcel.php for vulnerable unserialize patternOpen mexcel.php and search for the pattern: unserialize(base64_decode($_POST['mexcel'])) or similar variations without allowed_classes parameter.Affected if The file contains an unserialize() call on base64-decoded POST input without allowed_classes validation.
-
Confirm POST parameter processingLocate the code handling $_POST['mexcel'] in mexcel.php. Verify it passes the raw POST parameter directly to base64_decode() and then to unserialize().Affected if The $_POST['mexcel'] parameter is directly decoded and deserialized without sanitization.
-
Check application accessibilityVerify the Vfront application is accessible via HTTP/HTTPS. Test if the mexcel.php endpoint responds to requests.Affected if The vulnerable endpoint is reachable from the network.
You are affected if Vfront 0.99.52 is running, mexcel.php exists and contains the vulnerable unserialize() pattern on base64-decoded POST data, and the endpoint is network-accessible.
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 unserialize() with safer alternatives like json_decode() or, if PHP object handling is required, implement the allowed_classes parameter to whitelist only safe classes plus add input validation on the base64-decoded data before deserialization.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-60641 — 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-2025-60641 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