CVE-2026-15672
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 determined in itsourcecode Electronic Judging System 1.0. Impacted is an unknown function of the file /intrams/admin/add_judges.php. This manipulation of the argument fname causes sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
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 itsourcecode Electronic Judging System 1.0 allows remote attackers to inject malicious SQL queries via the fname parameter in /intrams/admin/add_judges.php. The lack of input sanitization or parameterized queries enables database compromise, potentially exposing sensitive data or enabling further system exploitation.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 Electronic Judging System installationIdentify if itsourcecode Electronic Judging System is installed in your environment and note the version number from application documentation, headers, or installer filesAffected if The installed version is 1.0 or falls within the affected version range for this product
-
Locate the vulnerable PHP fileSearch for the file /intrams/admin/add_judges.php in your web server document root or application directoryAffected if The file exists in your environment, indicating the potentially vulnerable component is present
-
Examine the fname parameter handlingInspect the add_judges.php file for how the fname parameter is processed; look for direct insertion into SQL queries without prepared statements or parameterizationAffected if The code shows fname is concatenated directly into SQL queries without sanitization or parameterized queries
-
Verify application is accessible via networkConfirm the /intrams/admin/add_judges.php endpoint is reachable over HTTP/HTTPS from your networkAffected if The vulnerable endpoint is exposed and accessible to network attackers
-
Check database error handlingTest the fname parameter with SQL syntax characters (such as single quotes) and observe if database errors are returned in the responseAffected if SQL syntax in the fname parameter triggers database errors or unexpected behavior, indicating the injection point is exploitable
Your environment is affected if you are running Electronic Judging System 1.0 with the /intrams/admin/add_judges.php file present and the fname parameter accepts unsanitized input into dynamic 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) and implement proper input validation on the fname parameter. Additionally, apply principle of least privilege to the database account and conduct thorough testing to verify the fix.
- 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-2026-15672 — 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-2026-15672 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