CVE-2018-25390: Unauthenticated SQL Injection in HaPe PKH 1.1

Technical summary

CVE-2018-25390 is an unauthenticated SQL injection vulnerability in HaPe PKH 1.1. The vulnerability exists in lap-peserta-perdesa-pdf.php, where the 'desa' POST parameter is not properly sanitized before being incorporated into SQL queries. An attacker can exploit this via time-based blind SQL injection—a technique that infers database content by measuring response timing differences—to enumerate schemas, extract data, or potentially modify database state. The vulnerability is classified as CWE-89 (Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command).

Business impact

Successful exploitation enables unauthorized data exfiltration from the HaPe PKH 1.1 database. Depending on what data is stored—participant records, personal information, or administrative details—attackers could compromise confidentiality and potentially satisfy prerequisites for follow-on attacks. The unauthenticated nature and network accessibility make this a direct external threat vector requiring no prior system access or user interaction.

Affected systems

HaPe PKH 1.1 is affected. Organizations running this version of the HaPe PKH application should assume they are vulnerable. Verify your deployment version against vendor release notes; patch availability and remediation guidance should be sought directly from the HaPe PKH vendor.

Exploitability

This vulnerability has a low barrier to exploitation. No special privileges are required, no user interaction is necessary, and the attack can be executed over the network. Time-based blind SQL injection is a well-understood technique; tooling and methodologies are mature. The CVSS 3.1 score of 8.2 (HIGH) reflects the high attack complexity ease (AC:L), high confidentiality impact (C:H), and lack of authentication requirements (PR:N).

Remediation

Apply a security patch from the HaPe PKH vendor immediately. Verify the patch version against the vendor advisory. Until patching is possible, implement input validation and parameterized queries (prepared statements) within the application code. Web application firewalls (WAF) may provide temporary mitigation by detecting and blocking SQL injection patterns in POST data targeting lap-peserta-perdesa-pdf.php. Database-level access controls should also be reviewed to minimize exposure if injection does occur.

Patch guidance

Contact the HaPe PKH vendor or check their security advisory portal for available patches. Apply the latest patched version to all affected instances in development, staging, and production environments. Verify that the patch addresses the SQL injection in the 'desa' parameter of lap-peserta-perdesa-pdf.php. After patching, conduct a quick regression test on the PDF export functionality to ensure stability.

Detection guidance

Monitor HTTP POST requests to lap-peserta-perdesa-pdf.php for suspicious 'desa' parameter values containing SQL keywords (SELECT, UNION, AND, OR, WAITFOR, SLEEP) or special characters (single quotes, semicolons, parentheses used in SQL syntax). Enable application or WAF logging to capture and alert on time-based payloads (e.g., SLEEP, BENCHMARK). Review database query logs for unusual delays or errors coinciding with suspicious HTTP requests. Implement alerting on failed SQL syntax errors originating from the web application layer.

Why prioritize this

This vulnerability merits immediate attention due to its HIGH CVSS score (8.2), unauthenticated attack vector, and direct confidentiality impact. The ease of exploitation via time-based blind techniques and network accessibility make it a priority for threat actors. Organizations should treat patching or mitigation as urgent to prevent database reconnaissance and data exfiltration.

Risk score, explained

The CVSS 3.1 score of 8.2 reflects: (1) network-accessible attack vector (AV:N), (2) low attack complexity requiring no special conditions (AC:L), (3) no authentication required (PR:N), (4) no user interaction needed (UI:N), (5) high confidentiality impact enabling data extraction (C:H), and (6) limited integrity impact (I:L) due to potential for data modification through UNION-based or stacked-query techniques. Availability is not directly impacted (A:N).

Frequently asked questions