CVE-2025-12930VulnerabilityPublished 10 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-12930: SourceCodester Food Ordering System · SQL Injection

Affects SourceCodester Food Ordering SystemSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 28% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Nov 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
SourceCodester Food Ordering System	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediately implement input validation and sanitization on the 'ID' parameter in /view-ticket.php to reject malicious SQL syntax. 2. Refactor the application code to use parameterized queries or prepared statements to prevent SQL injection. 3. Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with rules targeting SQL injection patterns to block exploit attempts at the network perimeter. 4. Conduct thorough code reviews and security testing on all user input handling components within the food ordering system. 5. Monitor database logs and application logs for unusual queries or access patterns indicative of exploitation attempts. 6. Restrict database user permissions to the minimum necessary to limit the impact of a successful injection. 7. If possible, isolate the food ordering system in a segmented network zone to reduce lateral movement risk. 8. Engage with SourceCodester or community forums for any forthcoming patches or updates. 9. Educate developers and administrators on secure coding practices and the risks of SQL injection. 10. Prepare incident response plans specific to web application attacks to enable rapid containment if exploitation occurs.

Description

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Food Ordering System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file /view-ticket.php. The manipulation of the argument ID leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations, exploitation of this vulnerability can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive customer data such as personal information, order details, and payment information, potentially violating GDPR regulations. Data integrity could be compromised, allowing attackers to alter orders or transactional records, which could disrupt business operations and damage customer trust. Availability impacts could arise if attackers execute destructive SQL commands, causing service outages or data loss. Small and medium-sized food service providers using this system may lack robust incident response capabilities, increasing the risk of prolonged downtime. Additionally, reputational damage and regulatory penalties could result from data breaches. The medium CVSS score reflects moderate risk, but the ease of remote exploitation without user interaction elevates concern. The lack of patches means organizations must rely on immediate mitigations to prevent exploitation. Overall, the threat poses a tangible risk to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of food ordering services across Europe, especially where SourceCodester products are in use.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Nov 2025, 04:45 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats