Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-31498 is a critical-severity Session Fixation (CWE-384) vulnerability in Phpgurukul Hospital Management System. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Steal Web Session Cookie (T1539); ranked in the top 20% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
A privilege escalation vulnerability tracked as CVE-2023-31498 affects PHP Gurukul Hospital Management System version 4.0 and stems from improper handling of the session token parameter, corresponding to CWE-384. The flaw received a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.8, reflecting network-accessible attack conditions that require no authentication or user interaction and can result in full compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted session token to escalate privileges, execute arbitrary code on the server, and retrieve sensitive information stored by the application. The published description indicates the issue can be triggered directly over the network without any prior foothold.
Public references consist of researcher disclosures on GitHub and Gist that appear to contain proof-of-concept material; no vendor advisory, patch information, or official mitigation guidance is provided in the available sources.
EPSS scores reached a peak of 0.0965 before settling at the current value of 0.0583, indicating modest post-disclosure interest without evidence of widespread exploitation.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-35803
Vulnerability Data
A privilege escalation issue was found in PHP Gurukul Hospital Management System In v.4.0 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code and access sensitive information via the session token parameter.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V4.4.4V7.6.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Session termination after a set interval shortens the usable lifetime of a fixed session identifier, making successful exploitation of session fixation more difficult.
Re-authentication typically forces issuance of a new session, limiting the window for exploitation of a previously fixed session identifier.
Enforces proper session ID generation and binding, preventing fixation of a known session token.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Proper authentication processes must invalidate prior session identifiers to prevent fixation attacks.
Managing identities and credentials includes handling session identifiers as temporary credentials that must be invalidated on re-authentication.
Protecting and verifying identity assertions encompasses secure handling and regeneration of session tokens.
Configuration baselines can enforce session regeneration and timeout settings that block fixation.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect session-fixation issues, yet the weakness absence does not replace comprehensive testing.
Access-control policy can mandate session invalidation on re-authentication, but does not prescribe the technical mechanism.
Identity-management procedures can require new session tokens after login, yet the control is broader than session handling.
Authentication-information rules can include session-token lifecycle requirements, but the control focuses on credential management.
Secure-SDLC requirement can embed session-fixation checks, but eliminating the weakness does not satisfy the full SDLC control.
Application-security requirements can specify session handling, yet the weakness fix alone does not meet the broader requirement.