VulnerabilityPublished 17 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6173: Webkul QloApps · SQL Injection

Affects Webkul QloAppsSource CVE Database V5

Public exploit available · CVSS 5.1 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:42 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.1Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 46% 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 17 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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
GitHubwebkul/qloapps`pkg:github/webkul/qloapps`Other threats	Affected =1.6.1	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Immediately restrict access to the /admin/ajax_products_list.php endpoint by implementing network-level controls such as IP whitelisting or VPN-only access to the admin panel.
Enforce strong, unique admin credentials and implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) to reduce the risk of credential compromise.
Monitor admin account activity for unusual behavior indicative of compromise or misuse.
Apply strict input validation and sanitization on all parameters, especially 'packItself', to prevent SQL injection, ideally by upgrading to a patched version once released.
Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block SQL injection attempts targeting this endpoint.
Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focused on admin interfaces and database interactions.
Segment the network to isolate the admin interface from public-facing systems, minimizing exposure.
Backup databases regularly and verify backup integrity to enable recovery in case of data corruption or deletion.

Description

A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Webkul QloApps 1.6.1. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /admin/ajax_products_list.php. The manipulation of the argument packItself leads to sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor confirms the existence of this flaw but considers it a low-level issue due to admin privilege pre-requisites. Still, a fix is planned for a future release.

Impact

For European organizations, particularly those in the hospitality sector using Webkul QloApps 1.6.1, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized database manipulation by malicious insiders or attackers who have obtained admin credentials. Potential impacts include exposure of sensitive customer data, alteration or deletion of booking records, and disruption of reservation services, which could lead to financial losses, reputational damage, and regulatory non-compliance under GDPR. Since the vulnerability requires admin privileges, the primary risk vector is credential compromise or insider threat. Organizations with weak admin credential management or insufficient network segmentation are at higher risk. The ability to remotely exploit the vulnerability increases the attack surface, especially for organizations exposing the admin interface over the internet or insufficiently protected internal networks. Given the critical nature of hospitality data and the reliance on accurate booking systems, exploitation could disrupt operations and erode customer trust.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Jun 2025, 07:04 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats