CVE-2025-62696
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 · uneditedImproper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection') vulnerability in The Wikimedia Foundation Mediawiki Foundation - Springboard Extension allows Command Injection.This issue affects Mediawiki Foundation - Springboard Extension: master.
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 confidenceCommand injection vulnerability in the MediaWiki Springboard Extension allows attackers to inject arbitrary OS commands through unsanitized user input being passed to system call functions. The improper neutralization of special elements enables remote attackers (assuming authenticated access based on typical extension architectures) to execute commands on the host system with the privileges of the web application.
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
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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 if Springboard Extension is installedCheck MediaWiki's Special:Version page or inspect the extensions directory for the Springboard extension filesAffected if Springboard Extension is present in the MediaWiki installation
-
Determine Springboard Extension versionLook for a VERSION, composer.json, or extension.json file within the Springboard extension directory to identify the installed version numberAffected if Version cannot be determined or is unknown relative to when the vulnerability was fixed
-
Identify system call usage in Springboard codeSearch Springboard extension source files (typically in extensions/Springboard/) for function calls that execute system commands such as exec(), shell_exec(), passthru(), system(), or proc_open()Affected if The extension contains code that passes user-supplied input to system execution functions without sanitization
-
Verify user input reaches system callsExamine the extension's PHP files to trace whether request parameters (GET, POST, or API inputs) are used as arguments to the identified system call functionsAffected if User-controllable input from web requests flows directly into shell execution functions
-
Confirm extension is accessible to authenticated usersReview MediaWiki permission settings and extension entry points to determine if the vulnerable code paths require authenticationAffected if The vulnerable code paths are reachable by authenticated users (as noted in the CVE summary)
A user is affected if the MediaWiki Springboard Extension is installed and its code passes unsanitized user input to PHP system execution 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 strict input validation and use parameterized command execution methods (such as exec() with array arguments or language-specific secure APIs) instead of shell interpretation. Alternatively, refactor to avoid system calls entirely if possible, or use allowlist validation for any permitted command arguments.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62696 — 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-2025-62696 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