CWE-352
AllowedCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Abstraction: Compound · Status: Stable
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
14233 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-7QXV-3FJ6-844C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 19:16 – Updated: 2022-05-24 19:16IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 6.1.1.0 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 204913.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-29837"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-10-06T17:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 6.1.1.0 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 204913.",
"id": "GHSA-7qxv-3fj6-844c",
"modified": "2022-05-24T19:16:45Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T19:16:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-29837"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/204913"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6495907"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-7QXV-9465-XVP7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:10 – Updated: 2025-04-12 12:33Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the web administration console in Fortinet FortiWeb before 5.2.0 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators via system/config/adminadd and other unspecified vectors.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-3115"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2014-05-08T14:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the web administration console in Fortinet FortiWeb before 5.2.0 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators via system/config/adminadd and other unspecified vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-7qxv-9465-xvp7",
"modified": "2025-04-12T12:33:30Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T04:10:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-3115"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2014/May/30"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.fortiguard.com/advisory/FG-IR-14-013"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/902790"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1030200"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-7R28-6J42-P3GG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-21 06:30 – Updated: 2026-03-21 06:30The Lobot Slider Administrator plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 0.6.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the fourty_slider_options_page function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify plugin slider-page configuration via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-3331"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-21T04:17:19Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Lobot Slider Administrator plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 0.6.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the fourty_slider_options_page function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify plugin slider-page configuration via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.",
"id": "GHSA-7r28-6j42-p3gg",
"modified": "2026-03-21T06:30:24Z",
"published": "2026-03-21T06:30:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-3331"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/lobot-slider-administrator/tags/0.6.0/lobot-slider-administrator.php#L33"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/lobot-slider-administrator/trunk/lobot-slider-administrator.php#L33"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/7b7c9123-a918-4fc0-9b16-f537b418b990?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-7R3H-4PH8-W38G
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-03-28 17:08 – Updated: 2024-03-28 17:08Impact
Affected configurations:
- Single-origin JupyterHub deployments
- JupyterHub deployments with user-controlled applications running on subdomains or peer subdomains of either the Hub or a single-user server.
By tricking a user into visiting a malicious subdomain, the attacker can achieve an XSS directly affecting the former's session. More precisely, in the context of JupyterHub, this XSS could achieve the following:
- Full access to JupyterHub API and user's single-user server, e.g.
- Create and exfiltrate an API Token
- Exfiltrate all files hosted on the user's single-user server: notebooks, images, etc.
- Install malicious extensions. They can be used as a backdoor to silently regain access to victim's session anytime.
Patches
To prevent cookie-tossing:
- Upgrade to JupyterHub 4.1 (both hub and user environment)
- enable per-user domains via
c.JupyterHub.subdomain_host = "https://mydomain.example.org" - set
c.JupyterHub.cookie_host_prefix_enabled = Trueto enable domain-locked cookies
or, if available (applies to earlier JupyterHub versions):
- deploy jupyterhub on its own domain, not shared with any other services
- enable per-user domains via
c.JupyterHub.subdomain_host = "https://mydomain.example.org"
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "jupyterhub"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.1.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-28233"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352",
"CWE-565",
"CWE-79"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2024-03-28T17:08:10Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2024-03-27T19:15:48Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nAffected configurations:\n\n- Single-origin JupyterHub deployments\n- JupyterHub deployments with user-controlled applications running on subdomains or peer subdomains of either the Hub or a single-user server.\n\nBy tricking a user into visiting a malicious subdomain, the attacker can achieve an XSS directly affecting the former\u0027s session. More precisely, in the context of JupyterHub, this XSS could achieve the following:\n\n- Full access to JupyterHub API and user\u0027s single-user server, e.g.\n - Create and exfiltrate an API Token\n - Exfiltrate all files hosted on the user\u0027s single-user server: notebooks, images, etc.\n - Install malicious extensions. They can be used as a backdoor to silently regain access to victim\u0027s session anytime.\n\n### Patches\n\nTo prevent cookie-tossing:\n\n- Upgrade to JupyterHub 4.1 (both hub and user environment)\n- enable per-user domains via `c.JupyterHub.subdomain_host = \"https://mydomain.example.org\"`\n- set `c.JupyterHub.cookie_host_prefix_enabled = True` to enable domain-locked cookies\n\nor, if available (applies to earlier JupyterHub versions):\n\n- deploy jupyterhub on its own domain, not shared with any other services\n- enable per-user domains via `c.JupyterHub.subdomain_host = \"https://mydomain.example.org\"`",
"id": "GHSA-7r3h-4ph8-w38g",
"modified": "2024-03-28T17:08:10Z",
"published": "2024-03-28T17:08:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/jupyterhub/jupyterhub/security/advisories/GHSA-7r3h-4ph8-w38g"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-28233"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/jupyterhub/jupyterhub/commit/e2798a088f5ad45340fe79cdf1386198e664f77f"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/jupyterhub/jupyterhub"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Cross site scripting (XSS) in JupyterHub via Self-XSS leveraged by Cookie Tossing"
}
GHSA-7R5H-FJ93-J8M6
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:06 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:06Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the underConstruction plugin before 1.09 for WordPress allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that deactivate a plugin via unspecified vectors.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2013-2699"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2014-04-10T20:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the underConstruction plugin before 1.09 for WordPress allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that deactivate a plugin via unspecified vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-7r5h-fj93-j8m6",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:06:53Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:06:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2013-2699"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/93857"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/52881"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://wordpress.org/plugins/underconstruction/changelog"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-7R5Q-4QGX-V545
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-14 15:40 – Updated: 2025-05-21 14:12Problem
A vulnerability has been identified in the backend user interface functionality involving deep links. Specifically, this functionality is susceptible to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF). Additionally, state-changing actions in downstream components incorrectly accepted submissions via HTTP GET and did not enforce the appropriate HTTP method.
Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires the victim to have an active session on the backend user interface and to be deceived into interacting with a malicious URL targeting the backend, which can occur under the following conditions:
- the user opens a malicious link, such as one sent via email.
- the user visits a compromised or manipulated website while the following settings are misconfigured:
security.backend.enforceReferrerfeature is disabled,BE/cookieSameSiteconfiguration is set tolaxornone
The vulnerability in the affected downstream component “Indexed Search Module” allows attackers to delete items of the component.
Solution
Update to TYPO3 versions 11.5.42 ELTS, 12.4.25 LTS, 13.4.3 LTS that fix the problem described.
Credits
Thanks to TYPO3 core and security members Benjamin Franzke, Oliver Hader, Andreas Kienast, Torben Hansen, Elias Häußler who fixed the issue.
References
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 10.4.47"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "typo3/cms-indexed-search"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "10.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "10.4.48"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 11.5.41"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "typo3/cms-indexed-search"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "11.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "11.5.42"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 12.4.24"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "typo3/cms-indexed-search"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "12.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "12.4.25"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 13.4.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "typo3/cms-indexed-search"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "13.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "13.4.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-55923"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352",
"CWE-749"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-01-14T15:40:59Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-14T20:15:30Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Problem\nA vulnerability has been identified in the backend user interface functionality involving deep links. Specifically, this functionality is susceptible to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF). Additionally, state-changing actions in downstream components incorrectly accepted submissions via HTTP GET and did not enforce the appropriate HTTP method.\n\nSuccessful exploitation of this vulnerability requires the victim to have an active session on the backend user interface and to be deceived into interacting with a malicious URL targeting the backend, which can occur under the following conditions:\n\n* the user opens a malicious link, such as one sent via email.\n* the user visits a compromised or manipulated website while the following settings are misconfigured:\n + `security.backend.enforceReferrer` feature is disabled,\n + `BE/cookieSameSite` configuration is set to `lax` or `none`\n\nThe vulnerability in the affected downstream component \u201cIndexed Search Module\u201d allows attackers to delete items of the component.\n\n### Solution\nUpdate to TYPO3 versions 11.5.42 ELTS, 12.4.25 LTS, 13.4.3 LTS that fix the problem described.\n\n### Credits\nThanks to TYPO3 core and security members Benjamin Franzke, Oliver Hader, Andreas Kienast, Torben Hansen, Elias H\u00e4u\u00dfler who fixed the issue.\n\n### References\n* [TYPO3-CORE-SA-2025-008](https://typo3.org/security/advisory/typo3-core-sa-2025-008)",
"id": "GHSA-7r5q-4qgx-v545",
"modified": "2025-05-21T14:12:05Z",
"published": "2025-01-14T15:40:59Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3/typo3/security/advisories/GHSA-7r5q-4qgx-v545"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55923"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3-CMS/indexed_search/commit/cfda3f1edeea3c50034bce5c25393e297408c2b4"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/TYPO3-CMS/indexed_search"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://typo3.org/security/advisory/typo3-core-sa-2025-008"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "TYPO3 Indexed Search Module vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery"
}
GHSA-7R75-Q8GX-VWXV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-12-31 18:30 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:36Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Eugen Bobrowski Robots.Txt rewrite allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Robots.Txt rewrite: from n/a through 1.6.1.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-62148"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-12-31T16:15:46Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Eugen Bobrowski Robots.Txt rewrite allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Robots.Txt rewrite: from n/a through 1.6.1.",
"id": "GHSA-7r75-q8gx-vwxv",
"modified": "2026-04-01T18:36:28Z",
"published": "2025-12-31T18:30:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62148"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/robotstxt-rewrite/vulnerability/wordpress-robots-txt-rewrite-plugin-1-6-1-cross-site-request-forgery-csrf-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vdp.patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/robotstxt-rewrite/vulnerability/wordpress-robots-txt-rewrite-plugin-1-6-1-cross-site-request-forgery-csrf-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-7R7F-RXMV-C4J3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-11-30 00:00 – Updated: 2021-11-30 00:00The Stetic WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery due to missing nonce validation via the stats_page function found in the ~/stetic.php file, which made it possible for attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in versions up to, and including 1.0.6.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-42364"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-11-29T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Stetic WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery due to missing nonce validation via the stats_page function found in the ~/stetic.php file, which made it possible for attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in versions up to, and including 1.0.6.",
"id": "GHSA-7r7f-rxmv-c4j3",
"modified": "2021-11-30T00:00:48Z",
"published": "2021-11-30T00:00:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-42364"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/stetic/trunk/stetic.php#L129"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wordfence.com/vulnerability-advisories/#CVE-2021-42364"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-7R7X-4C4Q-C4QF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-03-13 20:52 – Updated: 2023-03-13 20:52Impact
next-auth applications using OAuth provider versions before v4.20.1 are affected.
A bad actor who can spy on the victim's network or able to social engineer the victim to click a manipulated login link could intercept and tamper with the authorization URL to log in as the victim, bypassing the CSRF protection.
As an example, an attack can happen in the following scenario.
TL;DR: The attacker steals the victim's authenticated callback by intercepting and tampering with the authorization URL created by
next-auth.
- The victim attempts to log in to the
next-authsite. For example https://next-auth-example.vercel.app/ -
next-authsets thecheckscookies according to how the OAuth provider is configured. In this case,stateandpkceare set by default for the Google Provider.
-
The attacker intercepts the returned authorization URL, strips away the OAuth check (nonce, state, pkce), and returns the URL without the check to the victim's browser. For example: From
https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/v2/auth/oauthchooseaccount?client_id=client_id&scope=openid%20email%20profile&response_type=code&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fnext-auth-example.vercel.app%2Fapi%2Fauth%2Fcallback%2Fgoogle&state=state&code_challenge=code_challenge&code_challenge_method=S256&service=lso&o2v=2&flowName=GeneralOAuthFlowtohttps://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/v2/auth/oauthchooseaccount?client_id=client_id&scope=openid%20email%20profile&response_type=code&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fnext-auth-example.vercel.app%2Fapi%2Fauth%2Fcallback%2Fgoogle&service=lso&o2v=2&flowName=GeneralOAuthFlow. Notice the parametersstate,code_challengeandcode_verifierare removed from the victim's address bar. -
The victim attempts to log in using their OAuth account.
-
The Authorization Server logs the victim in and calls back to the
next-authapi/auth/callback/:providerIdendpoint. 5.1. The attacker intercepts and logs this callback URL for later use. 5.2.next-authchecks the callback call from OAuth Authorization Server (doesn't have checks) and compares the checks with the cookies set (has checks) at step 2. This check will fail, resulting in the victim isn't logged in. However, at this step, the Authorization Server has already accepted the victim's request to log in and generated/sent acodein the URL. - The attacker now has an authorization URL with the
codethat the AS will exchange for validaccess_token/id_tokenand can log in as the victim automatically. They can open a new browser window and paste in the URL logged at step 5.1 and log in as the victim.
Patches
We patched the vulnerability in next-auth v4.20.1
To upgrade, run one of the following:
npm i next-auth@latest
yarn add next-auth@latest
pnpm add next-auth@latest
Workarounds
Upgrading to latest is the recommended way to fix this issue. However, using Advanced Initialization, developers can manually check the callback request for state, pkce, and nonce against the provider configuration, and abort the sign-in process if there is a mismatch. Check out the source code for help.
References
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "next-auth"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.20.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-27490"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-03-13T20:52:50Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-03-09T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Impact\n`next-auth` applications using OAuth provider versions before `v4.20.1` are affected.\n\nA bad actor who can spy on the victim\u0027s network or able to social engineer the victim to click a manipulated login link could intercept and tamper with the authorization URL to **log in as the victim**, bypassing the CSRF protection.\n\nAs an example, an attack can happen in the following scenario. \n\n\u003e TL;DR: The attacker steals the victim\u0027s authenticated callback by intercepting and tampering with the authorization URL created by `next-auth`.\n\n1. The victim attempts to log in to the `next-auth` site. For example https://next-auth-example.vercel.app/\n2. `next-auth` sets the `checks` cookies according to how the OAuth provider is configured. In this case, `state` and `pkce` are set by default for the Google Provider.\n\u003cimg width=\"1971\" alt=\"Screen Shot 2023-03-03 at 09 54 26\" src=\"https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/31528554/222619750-a2062bb8-99eb-4985-a75c-d75acd3da67e.png\"\u003e\n\n3. The attacker intercepts the returned authorization URL, strips away the OAuth check (nonce, state, pkce), and returns the URL _without_ the check to the victim\u0027s browser. For example:\nFrom \n```https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/v2/auth/oauthchooseaccount?client_id=client_id\u0026scope=openid%20email%20profile\u0026response_type=code\u0026redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fnext-auth-example.vercel.app%2Fapi%2Fauth%2Fcallback%2Fgoogle\u0026state=state\u0026code_challenge=code_challenge\u0026code_challenge_method=S256\u0026service=lso\u0026o2v=2\u0026flowName=GeneralOAuthFlow```\nto\n```https://accounts.google.com/o/oauth2/v2/auth/oauthchooseaccount?client_id=client_id\u0026scope=openid%20email%20profile\u0026response_type=code\u0026redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fnext-auth-example.vercel.app%2Fapi%2Fauth%2Fcallback%2Fgoogle\u0026service=lso\u0026o2v=2\u0026flowName=GeneralOAuthFlow```.\nNotice the parameters `state`, `code_challenge` and `code_verifier` are removed from the victim\u0027s address bar.\n\n4. The victim attempts to log in using their OAuth account.\n\n5. The Authorization Server logs the victim in and calls back to the `next-auth` `api/auth/callback/:providerId`endpoint. \n5.1. The attacker intercepts and logs this callback URL for later use.\n5.2. `next-auth` checks the callback call from OAuth Authorization Server (doesn\u0027t have checks) and compares the checks with the cookies set (has checks) at step 2. This check will fail, resulting in the victim isn\u0027t logged in. However, at this step, the Authorization Server has already accepted the victim\u0027s request to log in and generated/sent a `code` in the URL.\n6. The attacker now has an authorization URL with the `code` that the AS will exchange for valid `access_token`/`id_token` and can log in as the victim automatically. They can open a new browser window and paste in the URL logged at step 5.1 and log in as the victim.\n\n\n### Patches\nWe patched the vulnerability in `next-auth` `v4.20.1` \nTo upgrade, run one of the following:\n```\nnpm i next-auth@latest\n```\n```\nyarn add next-auth@latest\n```\n```\npnpm add next-auth@latest\n```\n\n### Workarounds\n\nUpgrading to `latest` is the recommended way to fix this issue. However, using [Advanced Initialization](https://next-auth.js.org/configuration/initialization#advanced-initialization), developers can manually check the [callback request](https://next-auth.js.org/getting-started/rest-api#getpost-apiauthcallbackprovider) for `state`, `pkce`, and `nonce` against the provider configuration, and abort the sign-in process if there is a mismatch. Check out the [source code](https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/blob/v4/packages/next-auth/src/core/lib/oauth/checks.ts) for help.\n\n### References\n- [CSRF](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-10.12)\n- [PKCE vs nonce](https://danielfett.de/2020/05/16/pkce-vs-nonce-equivalent-or-not/)\n- [OAuth provider options](https://next-auth.js.org/configuration/providers/oauth)\n- [`checks` provider config](https://authjs.dev/reference/core/providers#checks)",
"id": "GHSA-7r7x-4c4q-c4qf",
"modified": "2023-03-13T20:52:50Z",
"published": "2023-03-13T20:52:50Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/security/advisories/GHSA-7r7x-4c4q-c4qf"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-27490"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://authjs.dev/reference/core/providers#checks"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://danielfett.de/2020/05/16/pkce-vs-nonce-equivalent-or-not"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/compare/next-auth@4.20.0...next-auth@4.20.1#diff-cf9257195d0cb6a835ae4ff1fc73fe2cac0bab847efb0832c1f551209a972b47R55"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://next-auth.js.org/configuration/initialization#advanced-initialization"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://next-auth.js.org/configuration/providers/oauth"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20230420-0006"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-10.12"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Missing proper state, nonce and PKCE checks for OAuth authentication"
}
GHSA-7R9G-MRCM-864M
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-09-07 00:01 – Updated: 2026-04-08 18:31The Banner Cycler plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including 1.4. This is due to missing nonce protection on the pabc_admin_slides_postback() function found in the ~/admin/admin.php file. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious web scripts into the page, granted they can trick a site’s administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-2233"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-09-06T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Banner Cycler plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including 1.4. This is due to missing nonce protection on the pabc_admin_slides_postback() function found in the ~/admin/admin.php file. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious web scripts into the page, granted they can trick a site\u2019s administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.",
"id": "GHSA-7r9g-mrcm-864m",
"modified": "2026-04-08T18:31:58Z",
"published": "2022-09-07T00:01:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-2233"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/banner-cycler/trunk/admin/admin.php#L131"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/6cc1d7f2-053d-42d4-afb7-6fb69fd71b91?source=cve"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/vulnerability-advisories/#CVE-2022-2233"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-4
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]
- Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
Mitigation
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
Mitigation
Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]
Mitigation
Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.
Mitigation
- Use the "double-submitted cookie" method as described by Felten and Zeller:
- When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user's machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same.
- Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult.
- This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
Mitigation
Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.
Mitigation
Check the HTTP Referer header to see if the request originated from an expected page. This could break legitimate functionality, because users or proxies may have disabled sending the Referer for privacy reasons.
CAPEC-111: JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)
An attacker targets a system that uses JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as a transport mechanism between the client and the server (common in Web 2.0 systems using AJAX) to steal possibly confidential information transmitted from the server back to the client inside the JSON object by taking advantage of the loophole in the browser's Same Origin Policy that does not prohibit JavaScript from one website to be included and executed in the context of another website.
CAPEC-462: Cross-Domain Search Timing
An attacker initiates cross domain HTTP / GET requests and times the server responses. The timing of these responses may leak important information on what is happening on the server. Browser's same origin policy prevents the attacker from directly reading the server responses (in the absence of any other weaknesses), but does not prevent the attacker from timing the responses to requests that the attacker issued cross domain.
CAPEC-467: Cross Site Identification
An attacker harvests identifying information about a victim via an active session that the victim's browser has with a social networking site. A victim may have the social networking site open in one tab or perhaps is simply using the "remember me" feature to keep their session with the social networking site active. An attacker induces a payload to execute in the victim's browser that transparently to the victim initiates a request to the social networking site (e.g., via available social network site APIs) to retrieve identifying information about a victim. While some of this information may be public, the attacker is able to harvest this information in context and may use it for further attacks on the user (e.g., spear phishing).
CAPEC-62: Cross Site Request Forgery
An attacker crafts malicious web links and distributes them (via web pages, email, etc.), typically in a targeted manner, hoping to induce users to click on the link and execute the malicious action against some third-party application. If successful, the action embedded in the malicious link will be processed and accepted by the targeted application with the users' privilege level. This type of attack leverages the persistence and implicit trust placed in user session cookies by many web applications today. In such an architecture, once the user authenticates to an application and a session cookie is created on the user's system, all following transactions for that session are authenticated using that cookie including potential actions initiated by an attacker and simply "riding" the existing session cookie.