| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| 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 Transporters.io plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.1.1. This is due to missing nonce validation on a 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. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the terms of use page in Liferay Portal before 7.3.6, and Liferay DXP 7.3 before service pack 1, 7.2 before fix pack 11 allows remote attackers to accept the site's terms of use via social engineering and enticing the user to visit a malicious page. |
| 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. |
| A security vulnerability in HPE IceWall Agent products could be exploited remotely to cause a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in the login flow. |
| 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. |
| binux pyspider up to v0.3.10 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the Flask endpoints. |
| A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in the component /endpoints/currency/currency of Wallos v4.1.1 allows attackers to execute arbitrary operations via a crafted GET request. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Taylor Hawkes WP Fast Cache allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects WP Fast Cache: from n/a through 1.5. |
| The ARMember Premium plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 6.7. This is due to incorrectly implemented nonce validation function on multiple functions. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify, or delete user meta and plugin options which can lead to limited privilege escalation. |
| The WPGlobus Translate Options 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 on__translate_options_page() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious web scripts and update plugin settings via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Cross-site request forgery vulnerability exists in surveillance cameras provided by i-PRO Co., Ltd.. If a user views a crafted page while logged in to the affected product, unintended operations may be performed. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WPJohnny, zerOneIT Comment Reply Email allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS).This issue affects Comment Reply Email: from n/a through 1.3. |
| 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. |
| The Paradox IP150 Internet Module in version 1.40.00 is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks due to a lack of countermeasures and the use of the HTTP method `GET` to introduce changes in the system. |
| Improper access control in the endpoint /RoleMenuMapping/AddRoleMenu of Digiteam v4.21.0.0 allows authenticated attackers to escalate privileges. |
| Various Lexmark devices have CSRF that allows an attacker to modify the configuration of the device. |
| SD.NET RIM versions before 4.7.3c contain a SQL injection vulnerability that allows attackers to inject malicious SQL statements through POST parameters 'idtyp' and 'idgremium'. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability by crafting specially formed POST requests to the /vorlagen/ endpoint, enabling unauthorized database manipulation and potential information disclosure. |
| The Responsive Contact Form Builder & Lead Generation Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.8.9. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on several functions. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to invoke those functions via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. These actions may result in form deletion, and lead signup as well as file upload. |
| The SMS for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.8.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on a 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. |
