| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The Bricks theme for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 1.8.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the 'reset_settings' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to reset the theme's settings via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Woffice Core plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 5.4.21. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the 'woffice_handle_user_approval_actions' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to approve registration for any user via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The SpeedSize Image & Video AI-Optimizer plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.5.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the 'speedsize_clear_css_cache_action' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to clear the plugins cache via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Event Monster – Event Management, Tickets Booking, Upcoming Event plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Information Exposure in all versions up to, and including, 1.4.3 via the Visitors List Export file. During the export, a CSV file is created in the wp-content folder with a hardcoded filename that is publicly accessible. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to extract data about event visitors, that includes first and last names, email, and phone number. |
| The Directorist: AI-Powered WordPress Business Directory Plugin with Classified Ads Listings plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Information Exposure in all versions up to, and including, 8.0.12 via the /wp-json/directorist/v1/users/ endpoint. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to extract sensitive data including including usernames, email addresses, names, and more information about users. |
| The Premium Packages – Sell Digital Products Securely plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 5.9.1. This is due to missing nonce validation on the addRefund() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to perform actions such as initiating refunds via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator or shop manager into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Tourfic plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.11.20. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the tf_order_status_email_resend_function, tf_visitor_details_edit_function, tf_checkinout_details_edit_function, tf_order_status_edit_function, tf_order_bulk_action_edit_function, tf_remove_room_order_ids, and tf_delete_old_review_fields functions. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to resend order status emails, update visitor/order details, edit check-in/out details, edit order status, perform bulk order status updates, remove room order IDs, and delete old review fields, respectively, via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The WP-BibTeX plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.0.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the wp_bibtex_option_page() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious web scripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The magayo Lottery Results plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.12. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the 'magayo-lottery-results' page. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update settings and inject malicious web scripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Transients Manager plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.6. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the process_actions function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete transients via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Podlove Podcast Publisher plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.2.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the ajax_transcript_delete() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary episode transcripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| GetSimple CMS Custom JS 0.1 plugin contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary client-side code into administrator browsers. Attackers can craft a malicious website that triggers a cross-site scripting payload to execute remote code on the hosting server when an authenticated administrator visits the page. |
| GetSimple CMS My SMTP Contact Plugin 1.1.1 contains a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. Attackers can craft a malicious webpage that, when visited by an authenticated administrator, can change SMTP configuration settings in the plugin. This may allow unauthorized changes but does not directly enable remote code execution. |
| Arunna 1.0.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate user profile settings without authentication. Attackers can craft a malicious form to change user details, including passwords, email, and administrative privileges by tricking authenticated users into submitting the form. |
| Selea Targa IP OCR-ANPR Camera contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to create administrative users without authentication. Attackers can craft a malicious web page that submits a form to add a new admin user with full system privileges when a logged-in user visits the page. |
| STVS ProVision 5.9.10 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to perform actions with administrative privileges by exploiting unvalidated HTTP requests. Attackers can visit malicious web sites to trigger the forge request, allowing them to create new admin users. |
| OpenBMCS 2.4 contains a CSRF vulnerability that allows attackers to perform actions with administrative privileges by exploiting the sendFeedback.php endpoint. Attackers can submit malicious requests to trigger unintended actions, such as sending emails or modifying system settings. |
| OrientDB 3.0.17 GA Community Edition contains cross-site request forgery vulnerabilities that allow attackers to perform unauthorized actions by crafting malicious requests to endpoints like /database/, /command/, and /document/. Attackers can create or delete databases, modify schema classes, manage users, and create functions by sending authenticated requests without token validation, combined with reflected and stored cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in the web interface. |
| KYOCERA Net Admin 3.4.0906 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to create administrative users without proper request validation. Attackers can craft malicious web pages that automatically submit forms to add new admin accounts with predefined credentials when a logged-in user visits the page. |
| Zcash zcashd before 6.12.0 allows invalid transactions to be accepted under certain conditions, which potentially could have resulted in the draining of user funds from the Sprout pool. It was sometimes not verifying Sprout proofs. |
