Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-352

Weakness Allowed

Cross-Site Request Forgery

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.

Mapping guidance

This is a well-known Composite of multiple weaknesses that must all occur simultaneously, although it is attack-oriented in nature.

While attack-oriented composites are supported in CWE, they have not been a focus of research. There is a chance that future research or CWE scope clarifications will change or deprecate them. Perform root-cause analysis to determine if other weaknesses allow CSRF attacks to occur, and map to those weaknesses. For example, predictable CSRF tokens might allow bypass of CSRF protection mechanisms; if this occurs, they might be better characterized as randomness/predictability weaknesses.

Relationships and members
ChildOf: CWE-345 · View CWE-1000
ChildOf: CWE-345 · View CWE-1003
Requires: CWE-346 · View CWE-1000
Requires: CWE-441 · View CWE-1000
Requires: CWE-642 · View CWE-1000
Requires: CWE-613 · View CWE-1000
Modes of introduction
Architecture and Design

REALIZATION: This weakness is caused during implementation of an architectural security tactic.

Detection methods

Manual Analysis

This weakness can be detected using tools and techniques that require manual (human) analysis, such as penetration testing, threat modeling, and interactive tools that allow the tester to record and modify an active session.

Specifically, manual analysis can be useful for finding this weakness, and for minimizing false positives assuming an understanding of business logic. However, it might not achieve desired code coverage within limited time constraints. For black-box analysis, if credentials are not known for privileged accounts, then the most security-critical portions of the application may not receive sufficient attention.

Consider using OWASP CSRFTester to identify potential issues and aid in manual analysis.

Effectiveness: High

These may be more effective than strictly automated techniques. This is especially the case with weaknesses that are related to design and business rules.

Automated Static Analysis

CSRF is currently difficult to detect reliably using automated techniques. This is because each application has its own implicit security policy that dictates which requests can be influenced by an outsider and automatically performed on behalf of a user, versus which requests require strong confidence that the user intends to make the request. For example, a keyword search of the public portion of a web site is typically expected to be encoded within a link that can be launched automatically when the user clicks on the link.

Effectiveness: Limited

Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Bytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis

Binary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Web Application Scanner

Effectiveness: High

Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Fuzz Tester

Framework-based Fuzzer

Effectiveness: High

Manual Static Analysis - Source Code

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Focused Manual Spotcheck - Focused manual analysis of source

Manual Source Code Review (not inspections)

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Source code Weakness Analyzer

Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Architecture or Design Review

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.)

Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Notes

Relationship

There can be a close relationship between XSS and CSRF (CWE-352). An attacker might use CSRF in order to trick the victim into submitting requests to the server in which the requests contain an XSS payload. A well-known example of this was the Samy worm on MySpace [REF-956]. The worm used XSS to insert malicious HTML sequences into a user's profile and add the attacker as a MySpace friend. MySpace friends of that victim would then execute the payload to modify their own profiles, causing the worm to propagate exponentially. Since the victims did not intentionally insert the malicious script themselves, CSRF was a root cause.

Theoretical

The CSRF topology is multi-channel:

Attacker (as outsider) to intermediary (as user). The interaction point is either an external or internal channel.

Intermediary (as user) to server (as victim). The activation point is an internal channel.

Content history
Submission: PLOVER · 2006-07-19 · CWE Draft 3
Contribution: Abhi Balakrishnan · 2024-02-29 · CWE 4.17

Contributed usability diagram concepts used by the CWE team.

Modification: Eric Dalci · Cigital · 2008-07-01 · CWE 1.0

updated Time_of_Introduction

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2008-09-08 · CWE 1.0

updated Alternate_Terms, Description, Relationships, Other_Notes, Relationship_Notes, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2009-01-12 · CWE 1.2

updated Applicable_Platforms, Description, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Observed_Examples, Other_Notes, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationship_Notes, Relationships, Research_Gaps, Theoretical_Notes

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2009-03-10 · CWE 1.3

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: Tom Stracener · 2009-05-20 · CWE 1.4

Added demonstrative example for profile.

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2009-05-27 · CWE 1.4

updated Demonstrative_Examples, Related_Attack_Patterns

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2009-12-28 · CWE 1.7

updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Detection_Factors, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Observed_Examples, Potential_Mitigations, Time_of_Introduction

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-02-16 · CWE 1.8

updated Applicable_Platforms, Detection_Factors, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-06-21 · CWE 1.9

updated Common_Consequences, Detection_Factors, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-09-27 · CWE 1.10

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-03-29 · CWE 1.12

updated Description

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-06-01 · CWE 1.13

updated Common_Consequences

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-06-27 · CWE 2.0

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-09-13 · CWE 2.1

updated Potential_Mitigations, References

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2012-05-11 · CWE 2.2

updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2012-10-30 · CWE 2.3

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2013-02-21 · CWE 2.4

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2013-07-17 · CWE 2.5

updated References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2014-07-30 · CWE 2.8

updated Detection_Factors

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2015-12-07 · CWE 2.9

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2017-11-08 · CWE 3.0

updated Applicable_Platforms, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Modes_of_Introduction, References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2018-03-27 · CWE 3.1

updated References, Relationship_Notes, Research_Gaps

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2019-09-19 · CWE 3.4

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-02-24 · CWE 4.0

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-06-25 · CWE 4.1

updated Relationships, Theoretical_Notes

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-08-20 · CWE 4.2

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2021-07-20 · CWE 4.5

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2021-10-28 · CWE 4.6

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2022-06-28 · CWE 4.8

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2023-04-27 · CWE 4.11

updated References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2023-06-29 · CWE 4.12

updated Mapping_Notes, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2024-11-19 · CWE 4.16

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2025-04-03 · CWE 4.17

updated Alternate_Terms, Common_Consequences, Description, Diagram

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2025-09-09 · CWE 4.18

updated Detection_Factors, Potential_Mitigations, References

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2025-12-11 · CWE 4.19

updated Applicable_Platforms, Relationships, Weakness_Ordinalities

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2026-10-28 · CWE 5.0

updated Applicable_Platforms, Name, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

15028 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-7FQX-R379-HX9F

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-18 18:30 – Updated: 2024-01-23 15:30
VLAI
Details

FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/score/scorerule_save

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-22601"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-01-18T17:15:14Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/score/scorerule_save",
  "id": "GHSA-7fqx-r379-hx9f",
  "modified": "2024-01-23T15:30:57Z",
  "published": "2024-01-18T18:30:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-22601"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ljw11e/cms/blob/main/5.md"
    }
  ],
  "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"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-7FR4-PQ6G-X238

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-03-01 03:30 – Updated: 2024-03-01 03:30
VLAI
Details

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS 9.7.2.7 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: 251216.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-28949"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-03-01T02:15:07Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS 9.7.2.7 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:  251216.",
  "id": "GHSA-7fr4-pq6g-x238",
  "modified": "2024-03-01T03:30:34Z",
  "published": "2024-03-01T03:30:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-28949"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/251216"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7124058"
    }
  ],
  "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-7FRJ-JJ6H-VHFX

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-01-16 21:30 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:33
VLAI
Details

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Oren Yomtov Mass Custom Fields Manager allows Reflected XSS.This issue affects Mass Custom Fields Manager: from n/a through 1.5.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-23430"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-01-16T20:15:34Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Oren Yomtov Mass Custom Fields Manager allows Reflected XSS.This issue affects Mass Custom Fields Manager: from n/a through 1.5.",
  "id": "GHSA-7frj-jj6h-vhfx",
  "modified": "2026-04-01T18:33:10Z",
  "published": "2025-01-16T21:30:59Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-23430"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/mass-custom-fields-manager/vulnerability/wordpress-mass-custom-fields-manager-plugin-1-5-csrf-to-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-7FV5-JGMR-JMC6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-10 18:31 – Updated: 2024-04-04 08:29
VLAI
Details

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WP Doctor WooCommerce Login Redirect plugin <= 2.2.4 versions.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-44995"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-10-10T16:15:10Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WP Doctor WooCommerce Login Redirect plugin \u003c=\u00a02.2.4 versions.",
  "id": "GHSA-7fv5-jgmr-jmc6",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T08:29:42Z",
  "published": "2023-10-10T18:31:31Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-44995"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/woo-login-redirect/wordpress-woocommerce-login-redirect-plugin-2-2-4-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:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-7FW5-G9H8-2VC5

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 02:34 – Updated: 2022-05-17 02:34
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Prime Collaboration Assurance could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack and perform arbitrary actions on an affected device. More Information: CSCvc91800. Known Affected Releases: 11.5(0) 11.6.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2017-6659"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2017-06-13T06:29:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Prime Collaboration Assurance could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack and perform arbitrary actions on an affected device. More Information: CSCvc91800. Known Affected Releases: 11.5(0) 11.6.",
  "id": "GHSA-7fw5-g9h8-2vc5",
  "modified": "2022-05-17T02:34:28Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T02:34:28Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-6659"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20170607-pca"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/98970"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1038633"
    }
  ],
  "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-7G34-3HCG-GWPH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 04:09 – Updated: 2022-05-17 04:09
VLAI
Details

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the web framework in Cisco Broadcast Access Center for Telco and Wireless (aka BAC-TW) allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that make BAC-TW changes, aka Bug IDs CSCuo23804 and CSCuo26389.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2014-2190"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2014-05-07T10:55:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the web framework in Cisco Broadcast Access Center for Telco and Wireless (aka BAC-TW) allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that make BAC-TW changes, aka Bug IDs CSCuo23804 and CSCuo26389.",
  "id": "GHSA-7g34-3hcg-gwph",
  "modified": "2022-05-17T04:09:59Z",
  "published": "2022-05-17T04:09:59Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-2190"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityNotice/CVE-2014-2190"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1030199"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-7G3P-35VC-MGJR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-18 12:40 – Updated: 2026-06-19 14:52
VLAI
Summary
Cotonti: Cross-Site Request Forgery in the administration rights handler
Details

Cotonti 1.0.0 (master branch, commit f43f1fc3) is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in the administration rights handler. In system/admin/admin.rights.php, the rights update action ('a=update') modifies group access rights (including via cot_auth_add_group) without calling cot_check_xg() to validate the anti-CSRF token. A remote attacker who lures an authenticated administrator into visiting a malicious page can force the browser to submit a forged request that grants elevated permissions to an attacker-controlled group, escalating privileges to administrator. Because Cotonti administrators can modify templates and configuration, this can be further leveraged toward remote code execution.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "cotonti/cotonti"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "1.0.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-55742"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-19T14:52:08Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-18T08:16:34Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "Cotonti 1.0.0 (master branch, commit f43f1fc3) is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in the administration rights handler. In system/admin/admin.rights.php, the rights update action (\u0027a=update\u0027) modifies group access rights (including via cot_auth_add_group) without calling cot_check_xg() to validate the anti-CSRF token. A remote attacker who lures an authenticated administrator into visiting a malicious page can force the browser to submit a forged request that grants elevated permissions to an attacker-controlled group, escalating privileges to administrator. Because Cotonti administrators can modify templates and configuration, this can be further leveraged toward remote code execution.",
  "id": "GHSA-7g3p-35vc-mgjr",
  "modified": "2026-06-19T14:52:08Z",
  "published": "2026-06-18T12:40:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-55742"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/Cotonti/Cotonti"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Cotonti/Cotonti/blob/f43f1fc38ba4e02027786dad9dac1435c7c52b30/system/admin/admin.rights.php#L53"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Cotonti: Cross-Site Request Forgery in the administration rights handler"
}

GHSA-7G3X-PG58-76WG

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-22 00:32 – Updated: 2026-07-22 00:32
VLAI
Details

Vulnerability in the Oracle HRMS (Japanese) product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Oracle Payroll Japanese). Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.3-12.2.15. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTPS to compromise Oracle HRMS (Japanese). Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle HRMS (Japanese) accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle HRMS (Japanese) accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 5.4 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N).

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-61253"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-07-21T22:18:56Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Vulnerability in the Oracle HRMS (Japanese) product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Oracle Payroll Japanese).  Supported versions that are affected are 12.2.3-12.2.15. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via HTTPS to compromise Oracle HRMS (Japanese).  Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in  unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle HRMS (Japanese) accessible data as well as  unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle HRMS (Japanese) accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 5.4 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts).  CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N).",
  "id": "GHSA-7g3x-pg58-76wg",
  "modified": "2026-07-22T00:32:25Z",
  "published": "2026-07-22T00:32:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-61253"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2026.html"
    }
  ],
  "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-7G57-8PFV-Q7Q8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-01-05 09:30 – Updated: 2026-04-28 21:33
VLAI
Details

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Marios Alexandrou Republish Old Posts.This issue affects Republish Old Posts: from n/a through 1.21.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-52145"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-01-05T09:15:10Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Marios Alexandrou Republish Old Posts.This issue affects Republish Old Posts: from n/a through 1.21.",
  "id": "GHSA-7g57-8pfv-q7q8",
  "modified": "2026-04-28T21:33:43Z",
  "published": "2024-01-05T09:30:33Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-52145"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/republish-old-posts/wordpress-republish-old-posts-plugin-1-21-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-7G5C-2436-6692

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-06 09:30 – Updated: 2025-07-06 09:30
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in 07FLYCMS, 07FLY-CMS and 07FlyCRM up to 1.3.9. This vulnerability affects unknown code. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product is published under multiple names. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-7078"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-07-06T09:15:23Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in 07FLYCMS, 07FLY-CMS and 07FlyCRM up to 1.3.9. This vulnerability affects unknown code. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product is published under multiple names. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
  "id": "GHSA-7g5c-2436-6692",
  "modified": "2025-07-06T09:30:31Z",
  "published": "2025-07-06T09:30:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-7078"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Excentique/yuxuan_mei/blob/main/07fly-crm_1.md"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.314992"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.314992"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.603552"
    }
  ],
  "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"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation MIT-4
Architecture and Design

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
Implementation

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
Architecture and Design

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
Architecture and Design

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
Architecture and Design
  • 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
Architecture and Design

Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.

Mitigation
Implementation

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.