CVE-2025-9391
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 weakness has been identified in Bjskzy Zhiyou ERP up to 11.0. Affected by this issue is the function getFieldValue of the component com.artery.workflow.ServiceImpl. This manipulation of the argument sql causes sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in Bjskzy Zhiyou ERP up to version 11.0 within the getFieldValue function of com.artery.workflow.ServiceImpl allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via manipulation of the sql parameter.
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<= 11.0CVSS 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 Zhiyou ERP installation and versionLocate the Zhiyou ERP application directory or check the application's about/version page to determine the installed version number. Compare it against the affected range (<= 11.0).Affected if The installed version of Zhiyou ERP is 11.0 or lower.
-
Confirm workflow module exposureIdentify whether the com.artery.workflow.ServiceImpl component is exposed via the application's web interface or API endpoints. Check if workflow services are accessible without authentication.Affected if The workflow ServiceImpl component is publicly accessible or accessible to untrusted users.
-
Detect sql parameter in HTTP requestsReview the application's HTTP request parameters or API endpoints to identify if a 'sql' parameter is accepted and processed by the getFieldValue function.Affected if The application accepts a 'sql' parameter in requests to the affected workflow service.
-
Review application logs for SQL injection attemptsSearch application and web server logs for suspicious patterns involving the 'sql' parameter, such as SQL keywords (UNION, SELECT, DROP) or unusual characters (' , ;, --) being passed to the sql parameter.Affected if Logs show SQL injection patterns being submitted to the sql parameter of the getFieldValue function.
A user is affected if Zhiyou ERP version 11.0 or lower is installed, the workflow module is exposed, and the sql parameter is accepted by the getFieldValue function.
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 dataSince the vendor is unresponsive, organizations should immediately restrict network access to the affected ERP system, deploy WAF rules to detect SQL injection patterns, and audit logs for indicators of compromise. Consider migrating to a supported ERP solution if no patch becomes available.
- 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-2025-9391 — 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-2025-9391 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