VulnerabilityPublished 18 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-63948: phpMsAdmin · CVE-2025-63948 is a medium-severity SQL Injection

Affects phpMsAdminSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 12% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
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 impacted component.
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 on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 18 Dec 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 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
GitHubsolonbarroso/phpMsAdmin`pkg:github/solonbarroso/phpMsAdmin`Other threats	Affected =2.2	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Given the absence of an official patch, European organizations should implement immediate compensating controls. These include restricting access to phpMsAdmin interfaces to trusted internal networks via firewall rules or VPNs, enforcing strong authentication and least privilege principles to limit attacker capabilities, and applying web application firewalls (WAFs) with SQL Injection detection and prevention rules tailored to the 'dbname' parameter. Input validation and sanitization should be enhanced at the application level if source code access is available. Regular monitoring of database logs for suspicious queries and anomaly detection can help identify exploitation attempts early. Organizations should also plan to upgrade to a patched version once available or consider alternative, more secure database administration tools. Conducting security assessments and penetration testing focused on SQL Injection vectors is recommended to verify mitigation effectiveness.

Description

CVE-2025-63948 is a medium-severity SQL Injection vulnerability in phpMsAdmin version 2.2, specifically in the database_mode.php file. It allows an attacker with low privileges to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the dbname parameter without user interaction. This can lead to limited information disclosure and database manipulation but does not affect availability. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild. The vulnerability requires network access and some level of privilege but no user interaction. European organizations using phpMsAdmin 2.2 should prioritize patching or mitigating this issue to prevent potential data breaches or unauthorized database changes.

Impact

For European organizations, exploitation of this vulnerability could result in unauthorized disclosure of sensitive data stored in databases managed via phpMsAdmin, such as customer information, internal records, or intellectual property. Manipulation of database contents could lead to data integrity issues, potentially disrupting business operations or corrupting critical data. While availability is not directly impacted, the indirect effects of data manipulation or leakage could cause reputational damage, regulatory non-compliance (e.g., GDPR violations), and financial losses. Organizations relying on phpMsAdmin 2.2 for database administration are at risk, especially those with internet-facing management interfaces or insufficient network segmentation. The medium severity suggests a moderate but actionable risk that should be addressed promptly to avoid escalation or combined attacks.

Summary

CVE-2025-63948 identifies a SQL Injection vulnerability in phpMsAdmin version 2.2, located in the database_mode.php script. The vulnerability arises from insufficient sanitization of the 'dbname' parameter, which is used directly in SQL queries. An attacker with low privileges can craft malicious input to manipulate the SQL query logic, enabling execution of arbitrary SQL commands. This can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive database information or modification of database contents. The vulnerability does not require user interaction and can be exploited remotely over the network. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 5.4 (medium), reflecting the network attack vector, low attack complexity, and the requirement of privileges. The impact includes confidentiality and integrity loss but no availability impact. No patches or known exploits are currently available, indicating the need for proactive mitigation. The CWE-89 classification confirms this as a classic SQL Injection flaw, a common and critical web application security issue.

CWE-89Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #2OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product constructs all or part of an SQL command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended SQL command when it is sent to a downstream component. Without sufficient removal or quoting of SQL syntax in user-controllable inputs, the generated SQL query can cause those inputs to be interpreted as SQL instead of ordinary user data.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Parameterization
If available, use structured mechanisms that automatically enforce the separation between data and code. These mechanisms may be able to provide the relevant quoting, encoding, and validation automatically, instead of relying on the developer to provide this capability at every point where output is generated.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Query Parameterization (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.3.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Command Line Execution through SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
Object Relational Mapping Injection (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering (opens in a new tab)
Expanding Control over the Operating System from the Database (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Dec 2025, 21:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-89

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats