CVE-2025-6267VulnerabilityPublished 19 Jun 2025Updated 23 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6267: zhilink 智互联(深圳)科技有限公司 ADP Application Developer Platform 应用开发者平台 · SQL Injection

Affects zhilink 智互联(深圳)科技有限公司 ADP Application Developer Platform 应用开发者平台Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 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 31% 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:X

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

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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 19 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
zhilink 智互联(深圳)科技有限公司 ADP Application Developer Platform 应用开发者平台	Affected =1.0.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediate network-level controls: Restrict access to the /adpweb/a/base/barcodeDetail/ endpoint using firewalls or web application firewalls (WAFs) to allow only trusted IP addresses or internal networks. 2. Input validation and sanitization: Implement strict input validation on the parameters barcodeNo, barcode, and itemNo at the application or proxy level to reject or sanitize suspicious inputs that could contain SQL syntax. 3. Use parameterized queries or prepared statements: If possible, review and update the application code to employ parameterized queries to prevent SQL injection. 4. Monitor and log: Enable detailed logging and monitoring of requests to the vulnerable endpoint to detect anomalous or suspicious activity indicative of exploitation attempts. 5. Segmentation: Isolate the ADP platform and its database from critical production systems to limit potential lateral movement in case of compromise. 6. Vendor engagement: Continue efforts to engage the vendor for official patches or updates; consider alternative platforms if no remediation is forthcoming. 7. Incident response readiness: Prepare incident response plans specifically addressing SQL injection attacks and potential data breaches related to this platform. 8. Regular security assessments: Conduct penetration testing and code reviews focusing on injection flaws in the platform and associated applications.

Description

A vulnerability was found in zhilink 智互联(深圳)科技有限公司 ADP Application Developer Platform 应用开发者平台 1.0.0. It has been rated as critical. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file /adpweb/a/base/barcodeDetail/. The manipulation of the argument barcodeNo/barcode/itemNo leads to sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations using the ADP Application Developer Platform 1.0.0 by zhilink, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized database access and manipulation. Potential impacts include leakage of sensitive business or user data, corruption or deletion of critical application data, and disruption of application functionality. Given the platform’s role as an application development environment, exploitation could also lead to compromise of applications built on top of it, further expanding the attack surface. The medium CVSS rating suggests that while the impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability is limited, the ease of remote exploitation without user interaction or authentication makes it a significant concern. Organizations in Europe that integrate this platform into their development or production environments may face compliance risks under GDPR if personal data is exposed. Additionally, the absence of vendor patches means organizations must rely on internal mitigations, increasing operational overhead and risk of exploitation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 19 Jun 2025, 14:31 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats