CVE-2025-6006VulnerabilityPublished 12 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6006: kiCode111 like-girl · SQL Injection

Affects kiCode111 like-girlSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/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: High
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: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
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 12 Jun 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 2026-10-26.

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
GitHubkicode111/like-girl`pkg:github/kicode111/like-girl`Other threats	Affected =5.2.0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should include restricting access to the /admin/ImgUpdaPost.php endpoint to trusted IP addresses or VPNs to limit exposure to authenticated users only. 2. Implement strict input validation and parameter sanitization at the web application firewall (WAF) level to detect and block SQL injection patterns targeting the id, imgText, imgDatd, and imgUrl parameters. 3. Enforce the principle of least privilege for user accounts with administrative access to minimize the risk of credential compromise leading to exploitation. 4. Monitor application and database logs for unusual query patterns or errors indicative of SQL injection attempts. 5. If feasible, disable or isolate the vulnerable functionality until a patch or vendor response is available. 6. Conduct an internal code review or penetration test focusing on SQL injection vulnerabilities in the affected application version. 7. Prepare for incident response by ensuring backups of the database are current and tested, enabling recovery in case of data tampering. 8. Engage with the vendor or community to seek updates or unofficial patches and consider upgrading to a newer, unaffected version if available. 9. Educate administrators about the risks of credential compromise and enforce multi-factor authentication to reduce the likelihood of unauthorized access.

Description

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in kiCode111 like-girl 5.2.0. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file /admin/ImgUpdaPost.php. The manipulation of the argument id/imgText/imgDatd/imgUrl leads to sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations using kiCode111 like-girl version 5.2.0, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily in environments where administrative access to the application is granted. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker with authenticated access to execute arbitrary SQL commands, potentially leading to unauthorized disclosure or modification of sensitive data stored in the backend database. This could affect data confidentiality and integrity, especially if the database contains personal data protected under GDPR. Although the vulnerability requires high privileges, insider threats or compromised credentials could be leveraged to exploit this flaw. The impact on availability is limited but could occur if injected SQL commands disrupt database operations. Given the administrative nature of the vulnerable endpoint, critical business functions related to content or image management could be disrupted. The absence of vendor patches means organizations must rely on internal controls to mitigate risk. This vulnerability could also be leveraged as a foothold for further lateral movement or privilege escalation within the network. European organizations in sectors such as media, e-commerce, or any industry using this product for web content management are at risk. Compliance risks also arise due to potential data breaches involving personal data.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Jun 2025, 01:38 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats