CVE-2025-6157VulnerabilityPublished 17 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6157: PHPGurukul Nipah Virus Testing Management System · SQL Injection

Affects PHPGurukul Nipah Virus Testing Management SystemSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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: None
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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
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 17 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 2026-10-25.

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
PHPGurukul Nipah Virus Testing Management System	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediate network-level controls: Restrict access to the Nipah Virus Testing Management System to trusted internal networks using firewalls and VPNs to prevent unauthorized external access. 2. Input validation and sanitization: Implement strict server-side validation and parameterized queries or prepared statements for all database interactions involving user-supplied input, particularly the 'testtype' parameter. 3. Application-layer firewall: Deploy a Web Application Firewall (WAF) with custom rules to detect and block SQL injection attempts targeting the vulnerable parameter. 4. Monitoring and logging: Enable detailed logging of database queries and web requests to detect anomalous activities indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. Segmentation: Isolate the testing management system within a dedicated network segment with limited access to other critical systems. 6. Patch management: Engage with the vendor (PHPGurukul) to obtain patches or updates; if unavailable, consider alternative secure solutions or temporary compensating controls. 7. Incident response readiness: Prepare to respond to potential data breaches by having forensic and remediation plans in place. 8. Regular security assessments: Conduct penetration testing and code reviews focusing on injection vulnerabilities to identify and remediate similar issues proactively.

Description

A vulnerability was found in PHPGurukul Nipah Virus Testing Management System 1.0. It has been rated as critical. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /registered-user-testing.php. The manipulation of the argument testtype leads to sql injection. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Impact

For European organizations, particularly healthcare providers, public health agencies, and laboratories involved in infectious disease testing, this vulnerability poses a significant risk. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to sensitive patient data, including test results and personal health information, violating data protection regulations such as GDPR. Data integrity could be compromised, potentially leading to incorrect test results being recorded or reported, which can have severe public health consequences. Availability impacts, while limited, could disrupt testing workflows if database corruption or denial of service occurs. The remote and unauthenticated nature of the exploit increases the likelihood of attacks, especially in environments where the system is exposed to the internet or insufficiently segmented networks. Given the critical role of such systems in managing infectious disease outbreaks, exploitation could undermine public health responses and erode trust in healthcare infrastructure.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Jun 2025, 03:34 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats