SQL injection vulnerability in ProFTPD Server 1.3.1 through 1.3.2rc2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via a "%" (pe
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Plan (action score 52/100)
- Public proof-of-concept code exists (Exploit-DB); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 73.7% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 99.4% of all records.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: proftpd-dfsg (Debian:12) 1.3.2-1; proftpd-dfsg (Debian:5.0) 1.3.1-17lenny1, 1.3.1-17lenny2; proftpd (openSUSE:Tumbleweed) 1.3.5b-2.5.
- Mentioned 1 time in Turkish national cyber security advisories (siberguvenlik.gov.tr).
Add it to your regular patch cycle. Upgrade to proftpd-dfsg (Debian:12) 1.3.2-1; proftpd-dfsg (Debian:5.0) 1.3.1-17lenny1, 1.3.1-17lenny2; proftpd (openSUSE:Tumbleweed) 1.3.5b-2.5 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
SQL injection vulnerability in ProFTPD Server 1.3.1 through 1.3.2rc2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via a "%" (percent) character in the username, which introduces a "'" (single quote) character during variable substitution by mod_sql.
- Published
- Feb 12, 2009
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 73.7% · 99th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-89
Report tools
Action score
52
Plan
Add it to your regular patch cycle.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 22 / 30 · 73.7%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- Proof of concept exists, no weaponized module
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| proftpd project | proftpd | cpe:2.3:a:proftpd_project:proftpd |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- proftpd project proftpd1.3.1
- proftpd project proftpd1.3.2
- proftpd project proftpd1.3.2_rc2
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | proftpd-dfsg | before 1.3.2-1 | 1.3.2-1 |
| Debian:5.0 | proftpd-dfsg | before 1.3.1-17lenny1 | 1.3.1-17lenny1 |
| Debian:5.0 | proftpd-dfsg | before 1.3.1-17lenny2 | 1.3.1-17lenny2 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | proftpd | before 1.3.5b-2.5 | 1.3.5b-2.5 |
Same product
proftpd project: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2006-5815Stack-based buffer overflow in the sreplace function in ProFTPD 1.3.0 and earlier allows remote attackers, probably authenticated, to cause 63This week
- CVE-2003-0831ProFTPD 1.2.7 through 1.2.9rc2 does not properly translate newline characters when transferring files in ASCII mode, which allows remote att54Plan
- CVE-1999-0368Buffer overflows in wuarchive ftpd (wu-ftpd) and ProFTPD lead to remote root access, a.k.a.52Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2006-6563Dec 15, 2006 · Stack-based buffer overflow in the pr_ctrls_recv_request function in ctrls.c in the mod_ctrls module in ProFTPD before 1.3.1rc1 allows local27Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2007-2165Apr 22, 2007 · The Auth API in ProFTPD before 20070417, when multiple simultaneous authentication modules are configured, does not require that the module 24Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2008-4242Sep 25, 2008 · ProFTPD 1.3.1 interprets long commands from an FTP client as multiple commands, which allows remote attackers to conduct cross-site request 29Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| debian:proftpd-dfsg | 1.3.2-1 · Debian:12 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:proftpd | 1.3.5b-2.5 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Exploit-DB entry ×2
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Exploit-DB entry | remote | 2009-02-10 |
| Exploit-DB entry | remote | 2009-02-10 |
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
- First PoC-3 d
- Published
- TodayOct 23, 2026+6462 d
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
National notice (Türkiye Cybersecurity Directorate / USOM)
Official security notices citing this record; remediation advice is on the agency's page.
- TR-20-633 · Aug 24, 2020(Proftpd Sunucu Güvenlik Güncellemesi)
Technical details
Attack conditions
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- P · data can be read
- Integrity
- P · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- P · the service can be disrupted
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Confidentiality impact
- P
- Integrity impact
- P
- Availability impact
- P
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-89 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')CVSS vector
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
nvd-primary
Root cause
The query text is built by concatenating user input. The database cannot tell where the data ends and the command begins.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-89 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const owner = req.query.owner;
const rows = await db.query(
"SELECT * FROM files WHERE owner = '" + owner + "'"
);Fixed
const owner = req.query.owner;
const rows = await db.query(
"SELECT * FROM files WHERE owner = $1",
[owner]
);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-109likelihood: Low · High
- SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-110likelihood: High · Very High
- Expanding Control over the Operating System from the DatabaseCAPEC-470Very High
- SQL InjectionCAPEC-66likelihood: High · High
- Blind SQL InjectionCAPEC-7likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (12 more)Show less
- secunia.com/advisories/34268
- security.gentoo.org/glsa/glsa-200903-27.xml
- www.debian.org/security/2009/dsa-1730
- www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?name=MDVSA-2009:061
- www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2009/02/11/1
- www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2009/02/11/3
- www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2009/02/11/5
- www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/500823/100/0/threaded
- www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/500833/100/0/threaded
- www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/500851/100/0/threaded
- www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/500852/100/0/threaded
- www.exploit-db.com/exploits/8037
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.