GSD-2022-4265

Vulnerability from gsd - Updated: 2023-12-13 01:19
Details
The Replyable WordPress plugin before 2.2.10 does not validate the class name submitted by the request when instantiating an object in the prompt_dismiss_notice action and also lacks CSRF check in the related action. This could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to perform Object Injection attacks. The attack could also be done via a CSRF vector against any authenticated user
Aliases
Aliases
CVE-2022-4265
To clipboard 

{
  "GSD": {
    "alias": "CVE-2022-4265",
    "description": "The Replyable WordPress plugin before 2.2.10 does not validate the class name submitted by the request when instantiating an object in the prompt_dismiss_notice action and also lacks CSRF check in the related action. This could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to perform Object Injection attacks. The attack could also be done via a CSRF vector against any authenticated user",
    "id": "GSD-2022-4265"
  },
  "gsd": {
    "metadata": {
      "exploitCode": "unknown",
      "remediation": "unknown",
      "reportConfidence": "confirmed",
      "type": "vulnerability"
    },
    "osvSchema": {
      "aliases": [
        "CVE-2022-4265"
      ],
      "details": "The Replyable WordPress plugin before 2.2.10 does not validate the class name submitted by the request when instantiating an object in the prompt_dismiss_notice action and also lacks CSRF check in the related action. This could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to perform Object Injection attacks. The attack could also be done via a CSRF vector against any authenticated user",
      "id": "GSD-2022-4265",
      "modified": "2023-12-13T01:19:15.502834Z",
      "schema_version": "1.4.0"
    }
  },
  "namespaces": {
    "cve.org": {
      "CVE_data_meta": {
        "ASSIGNER": "contact@wpscan.com",
        "ID": "CVE-2022-4265",
        "STATE": "PUBLIC"
      },
      "affects": {
        "vendor": {
          "vendor_data": [
            {
              "product": {
                "product_data": [
                  {
                    "product_name": "Replyable",
                    "version": {
                      "version_data": [
                        {
                          "version_affected": "\u003c",
                          "version_name": "0",
                          "version_value": "2.2.10"
                        }
                      ]
                    }
                  }
                ]
              },
              "vendor_name": "Unknown"
            }
          ]
        }
      },
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Lana Codes"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "WPScan"
        }
      ],
      "data_format": "MITRE",
      "data_type": "CVE",
      "data_version": "4.0",
      "description": {
        "description_data": [
          {
            "lang": "eng",
            "value": "The Replyable WordPress plugin before 2.2.10 does not validate the class name submitted by the request when instantiating an object in the prompt_dismiss_notice action and also lacks CSRF check in the related action. This could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to perform Object Injection attacks. The attack could also be done via a CSRF vector against any authenticated user"
          }
        ]
      },
      "generator": {
        "engine": "WPScan CVE Generator"
      },
      "problemtype": {
        "problemtype_data": [
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "lang": "eng",
                "value": "CWE-502 Deserialization of Untrusted Data"
              }
            ]
          },
          {
            "description": [
              {
                "lang": "eng",
                "value": "CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)"
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      "references": {
        "reference_data": [
          {
            "name": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/095cba08-7edd-41fb-9776-da151c0885dd",
            "refsource": "MISC",
            "url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/095cba08-7edd-41fb-9776-da151c0885dd"
          }
        ]
      },
      "source": {
        "discovery": "EXTERNAL"
      }
    },
    "nvd.nist.gov": {
      "configurations": {
        "CVE_data_version": "4.0",
        "nodes": [
          {
            "children": [],
            "cpe_match": [
              {
                "cpe23Uri": "cpe:2.3:a:gopostmatic:replyable:*:*:*:*:*:wordpress:*:*",
                "cpe_name": [],
                "versionEndExcluding": "2.2.10",
                "vulnerable": true
              }
            ],
            "operator": "OR"
          }
        ]
      },
      "cve": {
        "CVE_data_meta": {
          "ASSIGNER": "contact@wpscan.com",
          "ID": "CVE-2022-4265"
        },
        "data_format": "MITRE",
        "data_type": "CVE",
        "data_version": "4.0",
        "description": {
          "description_data": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "The Replyable WordPress plugin before 2.2.10 does not validate the class name submitted by the request when instantiating an object in the prompt_dismiss_notice action and also lacks CSRF check in the related action. This could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to perform Object Injection attacks. The attack could also be done via a CSRF vector against any authenticated user"
            }
          ]
        },
        "problemtype": {
          "problemtype_data": [
            {
              "description": [
                {
                  "lang": "en",
                  "value": "CWE-352"
                },
                {
                  "lang": "en",
                  "value": "CWE-502"
                }
              ]
            }
          ]
        },
        "references": {
          "reference_data": [
            {
              "name": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/095cba08-7edd-41fb-9776-da151c0885dd",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "tags": [
                "Exploit",
                "Third Party Advisory"
              ],
              "url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/095cba08-7edd-41fb-9776-da151c0885dd"
            }
          ]
        }
      },
      "impact": {
        "baseMetricV3": {
          "cvssV3": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 8.8,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
          "impactScore": 5.9
        }
      },
      "lastModifiedDate": "2023-03-11T04:32Z",
      "publishedDate": "2023-03-06T14:15Z"
    }
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

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.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.