Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-39318 is a high-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Churchcrm Churchcrm. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 27th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-39318 is an SQL injection vulnerability (CWE-89) affecting ChurchCRM, an open-source church management system, in versions prior to 7.1.0. The flaw exists in the endpoints `/GroupPropsFormRowOps.php`, `/PersonCustomFieldsRowOps.php`, and `/FamilyCustomFieldsRowOps.php`, where the `Field` parameter fails to properly sanitize user input, allowing injection of arbitrary SQL statements that can modify database tables.
Exploitation requires an authenticated user. For `/GroupPropsFormRowOps.php`, the attacker needs the `ManageGroups` privilege enabled, while `/PersonCustomFieldsRowOps.php` and `/FamilyCustomFieldsRowOps.php` require administrative privileges. Successful attacks enable remote modification of database contents over the network with low complexity and no user interaction, achieving high impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, as scored at CVSS 8.8 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
ChurchCRM advisories on GitHub (GHSA-8r53-w4r6-w62c, GHSA-j3vj-59vv-h4rc) confirm the vulnerability is fixed in version 7.1.0, recommending immediate upgrades for affected installations to mitigate the risk of unauthorized database alterations.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-19808
Vulnerability Data
ChurchCRM is an open-source church management system. Versions prior to 7.1.0 have an SQL injection vulnerability in the endpoints `/GroupPropsFormRowOps.php`, `/PersonCustomFieldsRowOps.php`, and `/FamilyCustomFieldsRowOps.php`. A user has to be authenticated. For `ManageGroups` privileges have to be enabled and for the other…
more
two endpoints the attack has to be executed by an administrative user. These users can inject arbitrary SQL statements through the `Field` parameter and thus modify tables from the database. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.1.0.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover SQLi flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from reaching SQL query construction without neutralization.
Secure engineering principles require parameterized queries and input sanitization that structurally eliminate SQLi.
System monitoring can identify attempted SQLi exploitation via anomalous queries after the weakness exists.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.