| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in loopus WP Attractive Donations System - Easy Stripe & Paypal donations WP_AttractiveDonationsSystem allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects WP Attractive Donations System - Easy Stripe & Paypal donations: from n/a through <= 1.25. |
| The Attachment File Icons (AF Icons) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery to Arbitrary File Upload in versions up to, and including, 1.3. This is due to missing nonce validation in the 'afi_overview' function and missing file type validation in the 'upload_icons' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to upload arbitrary files on the affected site's server which may make remote code execution possible via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Shield Security – Smart Bot Blocking & Intrusion Prevention Security plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 19.1.13. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the exec function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to disable pin protection for the admin interface of the plugin via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Poll, Survey & Quiz Maker Plugin by Opinion Stage plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 19.12.0. This is due to missing or insufficient nonce validation on the disconnect_account_action function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to disconnect the site from the Opinion Stage platform integration via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Wimi Teamwork versions prior to 7.38.17 contains a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in its API. The API accepts any authenticated request that contains a JSON field named 'csrf_token' without validating the field’s value; only the presence of the field is checked. An attacker can craft a cross-site request that causes a logged-in victim’s browser to submit a JSON POST containing an arbitrary or empty 'csrf_token', and the API will execute the request with the victim’s privileges. Successful exploitation can allow an attacker to perform privileged actions as the victim potentially resulting in account takeover, privilege escalation, or service disruption. |
| A security vulnerability in HPE IceWall Agent products could be exploited remotely to cause a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in the login flow. |
| In the OAuth library for nim prior to version 0.11, the Authorization Code grant and Implicit grant both rely on the `state` parameter to prevent cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks where a resource owner might have their session associated with protected resources belonging to an attacker. When this project is compiled with certain compiler flags set, it is possible that the `state` parameter will not be checked at all, creating a CSRF vulnerability. Version 0.11 checks the `state` parameter using a regular `if` statement or `doAssert` instead of relying on a plain `assert`. `doAssert` will achieve the desired behavior even if `-d:danger` or `--assertions:off` is set. |
| In the OAuth library for nim prior to version 0.11, the `state` values generated by the `generateState` function do not have sufficient entropy. These can be successfully guessed by an attacker allowing them to perform a CSRF vs a user, associating the user's session with the attacker's protected resources. While `state` isn't exactly a cryptographic value, it should be generated in a cryptographically secure way. `generateState` should be using a CSPRNG. Version 0.11 modifies the `generateState` function to generate `state` values of at least 128 bits of entropy while using a CSPRNG. |
| The TEM Opera Plus FM Family Transmitter application interface allows users to perform certain actions via HTTP requests without performing any validity checks to verify the requests. This can be exploited to perform certain actions with administrative privileges if a logged-in user visits a malicious web site. |
| The Joli FAQ SEO – WordPress FAQ Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.3.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when saving settings. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change the plugin's settings via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Easy Restaurant Table Booking plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when saving settings. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change the plugin's settings via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The ADFO – Custom data in admin dashboard plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.9.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on several functions hooked via the controller() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to edit the plugin's settings via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Apollo Studio Embeddable Explorer & Embeddable Sandbox are website embeddable software solutions from Apollo GraphQL. Prior to Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3, a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability was identified. The vulnerability arises from missing origin validation in the client-side code that handles window.postMessage events. A malicious website can send forged messages to the embedding page, causing the victim’s browser to execute arbitrary GraphQL queries or mutations against their GraphQL server while authenticated with the victim’s cookies. This issue has been patched in Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3. |
| A flaw was found in the Ansible aap-gateway. Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) origin checking is not done on requests from the gateway to external components, such as the controller, hub, and eda. |
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in TvRock 0.9t8a. If a logged-in user of TVRock accesses a specially crafted page, unintended operations may be performed. Note that the developer was unreachable, therefore, users should consider stop using TvRock 0.9t8a. |
| SkillTree is a micro-learning gamification platform. Prior to version 2.12.6, the endpoint
`/admin/projects/{projectname}/skills/{skillname}/video` (and probably others) is open to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. Due to the endpoint being CSRFable e.g POST request, supports a content type that can be exploited (multipart file upload), makes a state change and has no CSRF mitigations in place (samesite flag, CSRF token). It is possible to perform a CSRF attack against a logged in admin account, allowing an attacker that can target a logged in admin of Skills Service to modify the videos, captions, and text of the skill. Version 2.12.6 contains a patch for this issue.
|
| 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 . |
| Improper access control in the endpoint /RoleMenuMapping/AddRoleMenu of Digiteam v4.21.0.0 allows authenticated attackers to escalate privileges. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WPENGINE, INC. Advanced Custom Fields PRO.This issue affects Advanced Custom Fields PRO: from n/a before 6.3.2. |
| Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in LifestyleStore v1.0 allows a remote attacker to execute unauthorized actions on behalf of an authenticated user, potentially leading to account modifications or data compromise. |
