CVE-2025-69047
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 Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') vulnerability in magentech MaxShop sw_maxshop allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects MaxShop: from n/a through <= 3.6.20.
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 confidenceLocal File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability in magentech MaxShop theme allows attackers to manipulate filename parameters in PHP include/require statements to load arbitrary local PHP files. This can lead to remote code execution if attackers can upload malicious PHP files or access sensitive system files.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 if MaxShop theme is installedSearch the webroot for 'maxshop' theme directory or files (e.g., app/design/frontend/Magentech/maxshop or similar paths). Check composer.json or theme.xml for 'maxshop' or 'Magentech' references.Affected if MaxShop theme by Magentech is present in the Magento installation
-
Locate the theme versionCheck the theme's composer.json, registration.php, or theme.xml file for a version number. Also check any changelog or README files in the theme directory.Affected if Version cannot be determined or is earlier than the patched release
-
Search for vulnerable file inclusion patternsGrep the theme directory for dynamic include/require statements using variables in the filename parameter (e.g., 'include($_GET[', 'require_once($', 'include($filename', 'require($_REQUEST'). Use: grep -rn '\$_(GET|POST|REQUEST)\[' --include="*.php" within the MaxShop theme folder.Affected if PHP files contain include/require statements that directly use user-supplied input without validation
-
Check input validation on file inclusion parametersReview the PHP code around the identified include/require statements. Look for absence of basename(), realpath(), or whitelist validation before using the parameter in file operations.Affected if File inclusion parameters are used without sanitization functions or path validation
-
Verify if file upload functionality existsSearch for upload handling code in the theme (look for 'move_uploaded_file', '$_FILES', or upload controllers). Check if uploaded files are stored in accessible web directories.Affected if File upload capability exists and uploaded files are web-accessible, enabling RCE chain with LFI
Your environment is affected if the Magentech MaxShop theme is installed AND vulnerable file inclusion code using unsanitized user input exists in the theme files.
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 whitelist-based filtering on all file inclusion parameters. Use basename() and realpath() to validate that the requested path stays within intended directories, or replace dynamic includes with fixed includes.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-69047 — 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-2025-69047 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