| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| IBM Operations Analytics – Log Analysis versions 1.3.5.0 through 1.3.8.3 and IBM SmartCloud Analytics – Log Analysis are vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability that could allow an attacker to trick a trusted user into performing unauthorized actions. |
| The NewsBlogger theme for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions 0.2.5.6 to 0.2.6.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the newsblogger_install_and_activate_plugin() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to upload arbitrary files and achieve remote code execution via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. This is due to a reverted fix of CVE-2025-1305. |
| The Client secret is not checked when using the OAuth Password grant type.
By exploiting this vulnerability, an attacker could connect to a web server using a client application not explicitly authorized as part of the OAuth deployment.
Exploitation requires valid credentials and does not permit the attacker to bypass user privileges. |
| SpaceX Starlink Wi-Fi router Gen 2 before 2023.48.0 allows XSS via the ssid and password parameters on the Setup Page. |
| The Stop Spammers Security | Block Spam Users, Comments, Forms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2024.4. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the sfs_process AJAX action. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to add arbitrary IPs to the plugin's allowlist and blocklist via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Electron is an open source framework for writing cross-platform desktop applications using JavaScript, HTML and CSS. From versions 30.0.0-alpha.1 to before 30.0.5 and 31.0.0-alpha.1 to before 31.0.0-beta.1, Electron is vulnerable to an ASAR Integrity bypass. This only impacts apps that have the embeddedAsarIntegrityValidation and onlyLoadAppFromAsar fuses enabled. Apps without these fuses enabled are not impacted. This issue is specific to Windows, apps using these fuses on macOS are not impacted. Specifically this issue can only be exploited if the app is launched from a filesystem the attacker has write access too. i.e. the ability to edit files inside the .app bundle on macOS which these fuses are supposed to protect against. This issue has been patched in versions 30.0.5 and 31.0.0-beta.1. There are no workarounds for this issue. |
| The 5280 Bootstrap Modal Contact Form plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation in class-sbmm-list-table.php. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to bulk delete messages via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Schema App Structured Data plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.2.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the MarkUpdate function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update and delete post metadata via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| HCL BigFix Query is affected by a sensitive information disclosure in the WebUI Query application. An HTTP GET endpoint request returns discoverable responses that may disclose: group names, active user names (or IDs). An attacker can use that information to target individuals with phishing or other social-engineering attacks. |
| The WP User Profile Avatar plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.5. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the wpupa_user_admin() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugins setting which controls access to the functionality via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The 404 Error Monitor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the updatePluginSettings() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to make changes to plugin settings and clear up all the error logs via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The default TCL Camera application exposes a provider vulnerable to path traversal vulnerability. Malicious application can supply malicious URI path and delete arbitrary files from user’s external storage. |
| Tuleap is an Open Source Suite to improve management of software developments and collaboration. Tuleap Community Edition prior to version 16.13.99.1761813675 and Tuleap Enterprise Edition prior to versions 16.13-5 and 16.12-8 don't have cross-site request forgery protection in the management of SVN commit rules and immutable tags. An attacker could use this vulnerability to trick victims into changing the commit rules or immutable tags of a SVN repo. Tuleap Community Edition 16.13.99.1761813675, Tuleap Enterprise Edition 16.13-5, and Tuleap Enterprise Edition 16.12-8 contain a fix for the issue. |
| The Clickbank WordPress Plugin (Storefront) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.7. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation via the cs_menu 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. |
| CSRF in Ercom Cryptobox administration console allows attacker to trigger some actions on behalf of a Cryptobox administrator. The attack requires the administrator to browse a malicious web site or to click a link while he has an open session on the administration console. |
| The Wtyczka SeoPilot dla WP plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.3.091. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the SeoPilot_Admin_Options() function. 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 ViaAds plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.1.2. This is due to missing nonce validation on the `ViaAds_pluginHandler` function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify the plugin's API key and cookie consent settings via a forged request granted they can trick an administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Insecure handling of GET header parameter file included in requests being sent to an instance of the open-source project Phoniebox allows an attacker to create a website, which – when visited by a user – will send malicious requests to multiple hosts on the local network. If such a request reaches the server, it will cause one of the following (depending on the chosen payload): shell command execution, reflected XSS or cross-site request forgery.
This issue affects Phoniebox in all releases through 2.7. Newer 2.x releases were not tested, but they might also be vulnerable.
Phoniebox in version 3.0 and higher are not affected. |
| The Construction Light WordPress theme before 1.6.8 does not have authorisation and CSRF when activating via an AJAX action, allowing any authenticated users, such as subscriber to activate arbitrary . |
| An unauthenticated remote attacker can execute arbitrary commands with root privileges on affected devices due to lack of Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) protection. |
