CVE-2025-9831
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 PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System 1.1. This impacts an unknown function of the file /admin/edit-services.php. This manipulation of the argument sername causes sql injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.
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 PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System 1.1 allows remote attackers to inject malicious SQL queries via the 'sername' parameter in /admin/edit-services.php. With CVSS 9.8, this critical flaw enables complete database compromise.
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= 1.1CVSS 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.
-
Confirm PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System installationSearch the webroot for files containing 'Beauty Parlour' branding, footer links, or the characteristic 'bpms' folder structure commonly used by this applicationAffected if The application is installed on the server
-
Identify the installed versionCheck version.php, README.txt, or any version file in the application root for the exact version number. Common paths include /version.php, /includes/version.php, or the main index.php header commentAffected if The version is 1.1 exactly (the only affected version)
-
Verify vulnerable file existsCheck for the presence of /admin/edit-services.php in the webrootAffected if The file /admin/edit-services.php exists in the installation
-
Confirm admin interface accessibilityAttempt to access /admin/ or /admin/login.php to verify the admin panel is reachableAffected if The admin panel is accessible without authentication restrictions or uses default credentials
-
Identify the vulnerable parameter entry pointExamine the edit-services.php source code for the 'sername' parameter handling in SQL queries without prepared statementsAffected if The 'sername' parameter is used in a raw SQL query without parameterization
A server is affected if it runs PHPGurukul Beauty Parlour Management System version 1.1 with the /admin/edit-services.php file accessible and the 'sername' parameter accepting unsanitized user input 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 vulnerable SQL queries with prepared statements/parameterized queries, validate and sanitize all user input, and apply vendor patch if available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $4,304.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9831 — 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-2025-9831 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