CVE-2026-7392
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 has been found in SourceCodester Pharmacy Sales and Inventory System 1.0. This impacts the function delete_supplier of the file /ajax.php?action=delete_supplier. Such manipulation of the argument ID leads to sql injection. The attack can be executed 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 SourceCodester Pharmacy Sales and Inventory System 1.0 where the ID parameter passed to the delete_supplier function in /ajax.php?action=delete_supplier is not properly sanitized, allowing attackers to inject malicious SQL queries.
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.
-
Verify product and versionLocate the SourceCodester Pharmacy Sales and Inventory System installation and confirm the version number matches 1.0. Check for version files, about pages, or headers that indicate the installed version.Affected if The system is running version 1.0 of SourceCodester Pharmacy Sales and Inventory System.
-
Locate ajax.php fileSearch the web root directory for the ajax.php file that handles the delete_supplier action.Affected if The ajax.php file exists in the application web root.
-
Inspect delete_supplier function codeOpen ajax.php and locate the delete_supplier function. Examine how the ID parameter is handled within this function.Affected if The delete_supplier function is present and processes an ID parameter without using prepared statements or parameterized queries.
-
Check ID parameter handlingWithin the delete_supplier function, identify all SQL queries that use the ID parameter. Verify whether the ID value is directly concatenated into SQL queries or properly sanitized/escaped.Affected if The ID parameter is directly interpolated into SQL queries without input validation, escaping, or use of prepared statements.
-
Test endpoint accessibilityVerify the endpoint /ajax.php?action=delete_supplier is accessible over the network and accepts ID parameter input.Affected if The vulnerable endpoint is exposed and accepts user-supplied ID values without proper sanitization.
A system is affected if it runs SourceCodester Pharmacy Sales and Inventory System version 1.0 and the ajax.php file contains a delete_supplier function that passes the ID parameter directly into SQL queries without prepared statements.
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 for the delete_supplier function, implement proper input validation on the ID parameter, and apply least-privilege database access controls.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7392 — 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-2026-7392 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