VulnerabilityPublished 23 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-4580: code-projects Simple Laundry System · SQL Injection

Affects code-projects Simple Laundry SystemSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 26% 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 23 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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
code-projectsSimple Laundry System	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (1)

cpe:2.3:a:code-projects:simple_laundry_system:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

AI-suggested

Immediate mitigation should focus on input validation and sanitization: implement strict validation on the 'serviceId' parameter to allow only expected numeric or predefined values.
Employ parameterized queries or prepared statements in the /checkupdatestatus.php script to prevent SQL injection.
If source code modification is not feasible immediately, deploy a Web Application Firewall (WAF) with rules to detect and block SQL injection patterns targeting the vulnerable parameter.
Monitor logs for suspicious activity related to the 'serviceId' parameter to detect exploitation attempts early.
Restrict database user permissions to the minimum necessary to limit the impact of any successful injection.
Engage with the vendor or community to obtain official patches or updates and apply them promptly once available.
Conduct a security audit of the entire application to identify and remediate other potential injection points.
Educate staff about the risks and signs of exploitation to enhance incident response readiness.

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in code-projects Simple Laundry System 1.0. This impacts an unknown function of the file /checkupdatestatus.php of the component Parameters Handler. The manipulation of the argument serviceId results in sql injection. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.

Impact

The SQL injection vulnerability allows attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands on the backend database, potentially leading to unauthorized access to sensitive customer or operational data, data corruption, or denial of service by disrupting database operations. This can compromise the confidentiality and integrity of the affected system’s data and may also impact availability if critical database functions are disrupted. For organizations using the Simple Laundry System, this could result in operational downtime, loss of customer trust, regulatory non-compliance due to data breaches, and financial losses. Since the exploit requires no authentication and can be executed remotely, the attack surface is broad, increasing the risk of automated exploitation attempts. The impact is particularly significant for small to medium-sized businesses relying on this software for daily operations without extensive cybersecurity defenses.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…