CERTA-2008-AVI-060
Vulnerability from certfr_avis - Published: 2008-02-08 - Updated: 2008-02-08
Une vulnérabilité non publiée touche WordPress lorsque l'enregistrement en ligne est disponible.
Description
Le module xmplrpc.php permet à l'aide d'une requête spécifiquement créée de modifier les messages d'autres utilisateurs.
Solution
Mettre à jour en version 2.3.3 (cf. section Documentation).
Les versions antérieures à la 2.3.3.
| Vendor | Product | Description |
|---|
| Title | Publication Time | Tags | |
|---|---|---|---|
{
"$ref": "https://www.cert.ssi.gouv.fr/openapi.json",
"affected_systems": [],
"affected_systems_content": "\u003cp\u003eLes versions ant\u00e9rieures \u00e0 la 2.3.3.\u003c/p\u003e",
"content": "## Description\n\nLe module xmplrpc.php permet \u00e0 l\u0027aide d\u0027une requ\u00eate sp\u00e9cifiquement cr\u00e9\u00e9e\nde modifier les messages d\u0027autres utilisateurs.\n\n## Solution\n\nMettre \u00e0 jour en version 2.3.3 (cf. section Documentation).\n",
"cves": [
{
"name": "CVE-2008-0664",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2008-0664"
}
],
"initial_release_date": "2008-02-08T00:00:00",
"last_revision_date": "2008-02-08T00:00:00",
"links": [
{
"title": "Bulletin du NIST CVE-2008-0664 du 07 f\u00e9vrier 2008 :",
"url": "http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2008-0664"
},
{
"title": "Alerte de Secunia num\u00e9ro 27669 du 07 f\u00e9vrier 2008 :",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/27669/"
},
{
"title": "Notes de mise \u00e0 jour WordPress 2.3.3 du 5 f\u00e9vrier 2008 :",
"url": "http://wordpress.org/development/2008/02/wordpress-233/"
}
],
"reference": "CERTA-2008-AVI-060",
"revisions": [
{
"description": "version initiale.",
"revision_date": "2008-02-08T00:00:00.000000"
}
],
"risks": [
{
"description": "Atteinte \u00e0 l\u0027int\u00e9grit\u00e9 des donn\u00e9es"
}
],
"summary": "Une vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 non publi\u00e9e touche WordPress lorsque l\u0027enregistrement\nen ligne est disponible.\n",
"title": "Vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 dans WordPress",
"vendor_advisories": [
{
"published_at": null,
"title": "Bulletin de mise \u00e0 jour WordPress 2.3.3 du 5 f\u00e9vrier 2008",
"url": null
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.