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.
14161 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-FFXR-CWX4-68HM
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-03 15:30 – Updated: 2026-02-03 18:30Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in themelooks Enter Addons enteraddons allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Enter Addons: from n/a through <= 2.3.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-25014"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-02-03T15:16:19Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in themelooks Enter Addons enteraddons allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Enter Addons: from n/a through \u003c= 2.3.2.",
"id": "GHSA-ffxr-cwx4-68hm",
"modified": "2026-02-03T18:30:43Z",
"published": "2026-02-03T15:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-25014"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/enteraddons/vulnerability/wordpress-enter-addons-plugin-2-3-2-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-FG3M-42WQ-H6WJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-06-09 00:00 – Updated: 2022-06-15 00:00The Discy WordPress theme before 5.2 does not check for CSRF tokens in the AJAX action discy_reset_options, allowing an attacker to trick an admin into resetting the site settings back to defaults.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-1422"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-06-08T10:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Discy WordPress theme before 5.2 does not check for CSRF tokens in the AJAX action discy_reset_options, allowing an attacker to trick an admin into resetting the site settings back to defaults.",
"id": "GHSA-fg3m-42wq-h6wj",
"modified": "2022-06-15T00:00:21Z",
"published": "2022-06-09T00:00:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-1422"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/29aff4bf-1691-4dc1-a670-1f2c9a765a3b"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FG46-5WMX-P2GG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-02 15:31 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:35Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in VolThemes Patricia Blog allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Patricia Blog: from n/a through 1.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-38732"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-01-02T14:15:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in VolThemes Patricia Blog allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Patricia Blog: from n/a through 1.2.",
"id": "GHSA-fg46-5wmx-p2gg",
"modified": "2026-04-28T21:35:30Z",
"published": "2025-01-02T15:31:58Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-38732"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/theme/patricia-blog/vulnerability/wordpress-patricia-blog-theme-1-2-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-FG4Q-V7Q8-28MX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-04-15 12:30 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:34Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Stefano Lissa & The Newsletter Team Newsletter.This issue affects Newsletter: from n/a through 8.0.6.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-31434"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-15T10:15:10Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Stefano Lissa \u0026 The Newsletter Team Newsletter.This issue affects Newsletter: from n/a through 8.0.6.",
"id": "GHSA-fg4q-v7q8-28mx",
"modified": "2026-04-28T21:34:44Z",
"published": "2024-04-15T12:30:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-31434"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/newsletter/wordpress-newsletter-plugin-8-0-6-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:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FG4R-F9J2-36MW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:51 – Updated: 2023-02-08 17:54Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Jenkins before 1.514, LTS before 1.509.1, and Enterprise 1.466.x before 1.466.14.1 and 1.480.x before 1.480.4.1 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) execute arbitrary code or (2) initiate deployment of binaries to a Maven repository via unspecified vectors.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.509.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.513"
},
{
"fixed": "1.514"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2013-2034"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-02-08T17:54:38Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2014-05-14T19:55:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Jenkins before 1.514, LTS before 1.509.1, and Enterprise 1.466.x before 1.466.14.1 and 1.480.x before 1.480.4.1 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) execute arbitrary code or (2) initiate deployment of binaries to a Maven repository via unspecified vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-fg4r-f9j2-36mw",
"modified": "2023-02-08T17:54:38Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:51:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2013-2034"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2013:1032"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2013-2034"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=958958"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/SECURITY-63"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/SECURITY-69"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/SECURITY/Jenkins+Security+Advisory+2013-05-02"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.cloudbees.com/jenkins-advisory/jenkins-security-advisory-2013-05-02.cb"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [],
"summary": "Jenkins Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerabilities"
}
GHSA-FG4R-GVRC-V26G
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:33 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:33Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Igreks MilkyStep Light 0.94 and earlier and Professional 1.82 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-2954"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2015-06-13T14:59:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Igreks MilkyStep Light 0.94 and earlier and Professional 1.82 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users.",
"id": "GHSA-fg4r-gvrc-v26g",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:33:25Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:33:25Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-2954"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://jvn.jp/en/jp/JVN12241436/995646/index.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://jvn.jp/en/jp/JVN12241436/index.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://jvndb.jvn.jp/jvndb/JVNDB-2015-000079"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/75072"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-FG52-RC36-JP43
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 02:45 – Updated: 2023-07-07 21:02Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in baserCMS version 3.0.10 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators via unspecified vectors.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.0.10"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "baserproject/basercms"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.0.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-4878"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-07-07T21:02:50Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2017-05-12T18:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in baserCMS version 3.0.10 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators via unspecified vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-fg52-rc36-jp43",
"modified": "2023-07-07T21:02:50Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T02:45:13Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-4878"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/baserproject/basercms"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://jvn.jp/en/jp/JVN92765814/index.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20210308130052/http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/93217"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://basercms.net/security/JVN92765814"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "baserCMS Cross Site Request Forgery vulnerability"
}
GHSA-FG5R-5VWX-RPPH
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:47 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:47An issue was discovered in JTBC(PHP) 3.0.1.7. aboutus/manage.php?type=action&action=add allows CSRF.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-19327"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-11-17T15:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in JTBC(PHP) 3.0.1.7. aboutus/manage.php?type=action\u0026action=add allows CSRF.",
"id": "GHSA-fg5r-5vwx-rpph",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:47:39Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:47:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-19327"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/toiron/setest/blob/master/jtbcpublisharticle.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-FG6F-75JQ-6523
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-08 22:40 – Updated: 2026-03-30 12:20Security Advisory: Cache-Backed State Storage CSRF in Authlib
The Security Labs team at Snyk has reported a security issue affecting Authlib, identified during a recent research project.
The Snyk Security Labs team has identified a vulnerability that can result in a one-click account takeover in applications that utilize the Authlib library.
Description
Cache-backed state/request-token storage is not tied to the initiating user session, making CSRF possible for any attacker that possesses a valid state value (easily obtainable via an attacker-initiated authentication flow). When a cache is supplied to the OAuth client registry, FrameworkIntegration.set_state_data writes the entire state blob under _state_{app}_{state}, and get_state_data disregards the caller's session entirely. [1][2]
def _get_cache_data(self, key):
value = self.cache.get(key)
if not value:
return None
try:
return json.loads(value)
except (TypeError, ValueError):
return None
[snip]
def get_state_data(self, session, state):
key = f"_state_{self.name}_{state}"
if self.cache:
value = self._get_cache_data(key)
else:
value = session.get(key)
if value:
return value.get("data")
return None
authlib/integrations/base_client/framework_integration.py:12-41
Retrieval in authorize_access_token therefore succeeds for whichever browser presents that opaque value, and the token exchange proceeds with the attacker's authorization code. [3]
def authorize_access_token(self, **kwargs):
"""Fetch access token in one step.
:return: A token dict.
"""
params = request.args.to_dict(flat=True)
state = params.get("oauth_token")
if not state:
raise OAuthError(description='Missing "oauth_token" parameter')
data = self.framework.get_state_data(session, state)
if not data:
raise OAuthError(description='Missing "request_token" in temporary data')
params["request_token"] = data["request_token"]
params.update(kwargs)
self.framework.clear_state_data(session, state)
token = self.fetch_access_token(**params)
self.token = token
return token
authlib/integrations/flask_client/apps.py:57-76
This opens up an avenue for Login CSRF in applications that use cache-backed storage. Depending on the dependent application's implementation (e.g., whether it links accounts in the event of a login CSRF), this could lead to account takeover.
Proof of Concept
Consider a hypothetical application — AwesomeAuthlibApp. Assume that AwesomeAuthlibApp contains internal logic such that, when an already authenticated user performs a callback request, the application links the newly provided SSO identity to the existing user account associated with that request.
Under these conditions, an attacker can achieve account takeover within the application by performing the following actions:
- The attacker initiates an SSO OAuth flow but halts the process immediately before the callback request is made to AwesomeAuthlibApp.
- The attacker then induces a logged-in user (via phishing, a drive-by attack, or similar means) to perform a GET request containing the attacker's state value and authorization code to the AwesomeAuthlibApp callback endpoint. Because Authlib does not verify whether the state token is bound to the session performing the callback, the callback is processed, the authorization code is sent to the provider, and the account linking proceeds.
Once the GET request is executed, the attacker's SSO account becomes permanently linked to the victim's AwesomeAuthlibApp account.
Suggested Fix
Per the OAuth RFC [4], the state parameter should be tied to the user's session to prevent exactly such scenarios. One straightforward method of mitigating this issue is to continue storing the state in the session even when caching is enabled.
An alternative approach would be to hash the session ID (or another per-user secret derived from the session) into the cache key. This ensures the state remains stored in the cache while still being bound to the session of the user that initiated the OAuth flow.
Resources
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.6.5"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "authlib"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "1.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.6.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-68158"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-01-08T22:40:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-08T18:15:59Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "# Security Advisory: Cache-Backed State Storage CSRF in Authlib\n\nThe Security Labs team at Snyk has reported a security issue affecting Authlib, identified during a recent research project.\n\nThe Snyk Security Labs team has identified a vulnerability that can result in a one-click account takeover in applications that utilize the Authlib library.\n\n## Description\n\nCache-backed state/request-token storage is not tied to the initiating user session, making CSRF possible for any attacker that possesses a valid state value (easily obtainable via an attacker-initiated authentication flow). When a cache is supplied to the OAuth client registry, `FrameworkIntegration.set_state_data` writes the entire state blob under `_state_{app}_{state}`, and `get_state_data` disregards the caller\u0027s session entirely. [1][2]\n\n```py\n def _get_cache_data(self, key):\n value = self.cache.get(key)\n if not value:\n return None\n try:\n return json.loads(value)\n except (TypeError, ValueError):\n return None\n[snip]\n def get_state_data(self, session, state):\n key = f\"_state_{self.name}_{state}\"\n if self.cache:\n value = self._get_cache_data(key)\n else:\n value = session.get(key)\n if value:\n return value.get(\"data\")\n return None\n```\n\n*authlib/integrations/base_client/framework_integration.py:12-41*\n\nRetrieval in `authorize_access_token` therefore succeeds for whichever browser presents that opaque value, and the token exchange proceeds with the attacker\u0027s authorization code. [3]\n\n```py\n def authorize_access_token(self, **kwargs):\n \"\"\"Fetch access token in one step.\n\n :return: A token dict.\n \"\"\"\n params = request.args.to_dict(flat=True)\n state = params.get(\"oauth_token\")\n if not state:\n raise OAuthError(description=\u0027Missing \"oauth_token\" parameter\u0027)\n\n data = self.framework.get_state_data(session, state)\n if not data:\n raise OAuthError(description=\u0027Missing \"request_token\" in temporary data\u0027)\n\n params[\"request_token\"] = data[\"request_token\"]\n params.update(kwargs)\n self.framework.clear_state_data(session, state)\n token = self.fetch_access_token(**params)\n self.token = token\n return token\n```\n\n*authlib/integrations/flask_client/apps.py:57-76*\n\nThis opens up an avenue for Login CSRF in applications that use cache-backed storage. Depending on the dependent application\u0027s implementation (e.g., whether it links accounts in the event of a login CSRF), this could lead to account takeover.\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\nConsider a hypothetical application \u2014 AwesomeAuthlibApp. Assume that AwesomeAuthlibApp contains internal logic such that, when an already authenticated user performs a `callback` request, the application links the newly provided SSO identity to the existing user account associated with that request.\n\nUnder these conditions, an attacker can achieve account takeover within the application by performing the following actions:\n\n1. The attacker initiates an SSO OAuth flow but halts the process immediately before the callback request is made to AwesomeAuthlibApp.\n2. The attacker then induces a logged-in user (via phishing, a drive-by attack, or similar means) to perform a GET request containing the attacker\u0027s state value and authorization code to the AwesomeAuthlibApp callback endpoint. Because Authlib does not verify whether the state token is bound to the session performing the callback, the callback is processed, the authorization code is sent to the provider, and the account linking proceeds.\n\nOnce the GET request is executed, the attacker\u0027s SSO account becomes permanently linked to the victim\u0027s AwesomeAuthlibApp account.\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nPer the OAuth RFC [4], the state parameter should be tied to the user\u0027s session to prevent exactly such scenarios. One straightforward method of mitigating this issue is to continue storing the state in the session even when caching is enabled.\n\nAn alternative approach would be to hash the session ID (or another per-user secret derived from the session) into the cache key. This ensures the state remains stored in the cache while still being bound to the session of the user that initiated the OAuth flow.\n\n## Resources\n\n- [1] [flask_client/apps.py#L35](https://github.com/authlib/authlib/blob/260d04edee23d8470057ea659c16fb8a2c7b0dc2/authlib/integrations/flask_client/apps.py#L35)\n- [2] [base_client/framework_integration.py#L33](https://github.com/authlib/authlib/blob/260d04edee23d8470057ea659c16fb8a2c7b0dc2/authlib/integrations/base_client/framework_integration.py#L33)\n- [3] [flask_client/apps.py#L57](https://github.com/authlib/authlib/blob/260d04edee23d8470057ea659c16fb8a2c7b0dc2/authlib/integrations/flask_client/apps.py#L57)\n- [4] [RFC 6749 \u00a710.12](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6749#section-10.12)",
"id": "GHSA-fg6f-75jq-6523",
"modified": "2026-03-30T12:20:14Z",
"published": "2026-01-08T22:40:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-fg6f-75jq-6523"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-68158"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/commit/2808378611dd6fb2532b189a9087877d8f0c0489"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/commit/7974f45e4d7492ab5f527577677f2770ce423228"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib has 1-click Account Takeover vulnerability"
}
GHSA-FG8X-C2RV-V75Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-06-14 03:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 04:49The MStore API plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery due to missing nonce validation on the mstore_update_new_order_title function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update new order title via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-3201"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-06-14T02:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The MStore API plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery due to missing nonce validation on the mstore_update_new_order_title function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update new order title via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.",
"id": "GHSA-fg8x-c2rv-v75q",
"modified": "2024-04-04T04:49:22Z",
"published": "2023-06-14T03:30:17Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-3201"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/mstore-api/trunk/mstore-api.php#L240"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026old=2925048%40mstore-api\u0026new=2925048%40mstore-api\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/cb5cb1a5-30d2-434f-90f9-d37aecfbe158?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"
}
]
}
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.