| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Some endpoints in vulnerability-lookup that modified
application state (e.g. changing database entries, user data,
configurations, or other privileged actions) may have been accessible
via HTTP GET requests without requiring a CSRF token. This flaw leaves
the application vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks:
an attacker who tricks a logged-in user into visiting a malicious
website could cause the user’s browser to issue GET requests that
perform unintended state-changing operations in the context of their
authenticated session.
Because the server would treat these GET requests as valid (since no
CSRF protection or POST method enforcement was in place), the attacker
could exploit this to escalate privileges, change settings, or carry out
other unauthorized actions without needing the user’s explicit consent
or awareness.
The fix ensures that all state-changing endpoints now require HTTP POST
requests and include a valid CSRF token. This enforces that state
changes cannot be triggered by arbitrary cross-site GET requests. This issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in eyecix JobSearch allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects JobSearch: from n/a through 2.5.3. |
| Various Lexmark devices have CSRF that allows an attacker to modify the configuration of the device. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM ROX MX5000 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX MX5000RE (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1400 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1500 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1501 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1510 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1511 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1512 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1524 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX1536 (All versions < V2.16.0), RUGGEDCOM ROX RX5000 (All versions < V2.16.0). The CLI feature in the web interface of affected devices is vulnerable to
cross-site request forgery (CSRF).
This could allow an attacker to read or modify the device configuration
by tricking an authenticated legitimate user into accessing a malicious link. |
| Ubee EVW327 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to enable remote access without user interaction. Attackers can craft a malicious webpage that automatically submits a form to change router remote access settings to port 8080 without the user's consent. |
| b2evolution 7.2.2 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to modify admin account details without authentication. Attackers can craft a malicious HTML form to submit unauthorized changes to user profiles by tricking victims into loading a specially crafted webpage. |
| A security vulnerability in HPE IceWall Agent products could be exploited remotely to cause a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in the login flow. |
| Cross site request forgery in Kiteworks OwnCloud allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge requests.
If a request has no Authorization header, it is created with an empty string as value by a rewrite rule. The CSRF check is done by comparing the header value to null, meaning that the existing CSRF check is bypassed in this case. An attacker can, for example, create a new administrator account if the request is executed in the browser of an authenticated victim. |
| In the OAuth library for nim prior to version 0.11, the Authorization Code grant and Implicit grant both rely on the `state` parameter to prevent cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks where a resource owner might have their session associated with protected resources belonging to an attacker. When this project is compiled with certain compiler flags set, it is possible that the `state` parameter will not be checked at all, creating a CSRF vulnerability. Version 0.11 checks the `state` parameter using a regular `if` statement or `doAssert` instead of relying on a plain `assert`. `doAssert` will achieve the desired behavior even if `-d:danger` or `--assertions:off` is set. |
| In the OAuth library for nim prior to version 0.11, the `state` values generated by the `generateState` function do not have sufficient entropy. These can be successfully guessed by an attacker allowing them to perform a CSRF vs a user, associating the user's session with the attacker's protected resources. While `state` isn't exactly a cryptographic value, it should be generated in a cryptographically secure way. `generateState` should be using a CSPRNG. Version 0.11 modifies the `generateState` function to generate `state` values of at least 128 bits of entropy while using a CSPRNG. |
| 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 404 Error Monitor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the updatePluginSettings() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to make changes to plugin settings and clear up all the error logs via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Pricing Table plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the ajax() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to perform a variety of actions related to managing pricing tables via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The CM Tooltip Glossary – Powerful Glossary Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.2.11. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when saving settings. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change the plugin's settings or reset them via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Easy Restaurant Table Booking plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when saving settings. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change 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 Joli FAQ SEO – WordPress FAQ Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.3.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when saving settings. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change 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. |
| Zucchetti Axess CLOKI Access Control 1.64 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate access control settings without user interaction. Attackers can craft malicious web pages with hidden forms to disable or modify access control parameters by tricking authenticated users into loading the page. |
| The Clickbank WordPress Plugin (Storefront) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.7. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation via the cs_menu page. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update settings and 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. |
| The Simple Redirection plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.5. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the settings_page() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's settings and redirect all site visitors via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Skt NURCaptcha plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.5.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation in the skt-nurc-admin.php file. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update settings and 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. |
