CVE-2026-7555
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 identified in itsourcecode Electronic Judging System 1.0. This affects an unknown part of the file /intrams/login.php. Such manipulation of the argument Username leads to sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might 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 · moderate confidenceSQL injection vulnerability in itsourcecode Electronic Judging System 1.0's /intrams/login.php file. The Username parameter is not properly sanitized, allowing remote attackers to inject arbitrary SQL commands. This is a high-severity issue as it could allow unauthenticated or authenticated attackers to access, modify, or delete database contents.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 installationSearch the web root directory for the 'intrams' folder or check for the presence of login.php in the web server's document root.Affected if The 'intrams' directory exists on the server.
-
Verify the application versionLocate version information in the application, such as a readme file, footer, or admin panel. Compare the installed version to the 1.0 release mentioned in the CVE.Affected if The installed version matches 1.0.
-
Locate the vulnerable login fileCheck for the file /intrams/login.php within the web server's document root.Affected if The file /intrams/login.php exists on the system.
-
Inspect the Username parameter handlingOpen /intrams/login.php and examine how the Username parameter is processed. Search for SQL query construction that directly incorporates the username input without using prepared statements or parameter binding.Affected if The code contains direct SQL concatenation of the Username parameter without sanitization or parameterized queries.
-
Determine network exposureVerify whether the /intrams/login.php endpoint is accessible over the network, as this vulnerability can be exploited remotely.Affected if The login.php page is reachable from the network without authentication.
A user is affected if they are running Electronic Judging System version 1.0 with the /intrams/login.php file accessible and the Username parameter handled via direct SQL concatenation.
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 in the login.php file. Implement strict input validation on all user-supplied fields and apply the vendor patch when available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7555 — 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-2026-7555 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