CVE-2025-6823
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 vulnerability was found in code-projects Inventory Management System 1.0. It has been rated as critical. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file /php_action/editProduct.php. The manipulation of the argument editProductName leads to sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
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 the Inventory Management System 1.0 allows remote attackers to inject malicious SQL queries via the editProductName parameter in /php_action/editProduct.php. The lack of input sanitization or parameterized queries enables attackers to manipulate database queries.
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 application versionLocate and examine the application's version identifier in its source files, README, or about page. Common paths include root-level version files or the main index.php header comments.Affected if The installed version is Code Projects Inventory Management System version 1.0
-
Locate the vulnerable PHP fileVerify the existence of /php_action/editProduct.php in the web root directory of the application.Affected if The file /php_action/editProduct.php exists in the deployed application
-
Examine the editProductName parameter handlingOpen editProduct.php and search for the editProductName parameter. Check whether SQL queries involving this parameter use prepared statements (parameterized queries) or direct string concatenation.Affected if The editProductName parameter is used in SQL queries without prepared statement binding (e.g., direct string interpolation or concatenation into the query)
-
Confirm network accessibilityDetermine if the web application is accessible over the network (internal or external). Check if the /php_action/editProduct.php endpoint is reachable via HTTP/HTTPS.Affected if The application is network-accessible and the editProduct.php endpoint is reachable
The environment is affected if it runs Code Projects Inventory Management System version 1.0 with the vulnerable editProduct.php file containing unsanitized editProductName parameter handling in SQL 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 dataReplace dynamic SQL queries with parameterized queries (prepared statements) in editProduct.php and audit the entire application for similar SQL injection vulnerabilities.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-6823 — 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-2025-6823 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