| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The Paradox IP150 Internet Module in version 1.40.00 is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks due to a lack of countermeasures and the use of the HTTP method `GET` to introduce changes in the system. |
| 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. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Code Amp Search & Filter search-filter allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Search & Filter: from n/a through <= 1.2.17. |
| Cross-site request forgery vulnerability exists in Activity Log WinterLock versions prior to 1.2.5. If a user views a malicious page while logged in, the log data may be deleted. |
| In QUIC in RFC 9000, the Latency Spin Bit specification (section 17.4) does not strictly constrain the bit value when the feature is disabled, which might allow remote attackers to construct a covert channel with data represented as changes to the bit value. NOTE: The "Sheridan, S., Keane, A. (2015). In Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security (ECCWS), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK." paper says "Modern Internet communication protocols provide an almost infinite number of ways in which data can be hidden or embed whithin seemingly normal network traffic." |
| The Custom Product List Table plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.0.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when modifying products. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to add, delete, bulk edit, approve or cancel products via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Sparx Systems Pro Cloud Server allows Cross-Site Request Forgery to perform Session Hijacking. Cross-Site Request Forgery is present at the whole application but it can be used to change the Pro Cloud Server Configuration password.
This issue affects Pro Cloud Server: earlier than 6.0.165. |
| gorilla/csrf provides Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) prevention middleware for Go web applications & services. Prior to 1.7.2, gorilla/csrf does not validate the Origin header against an allowlist. Its executes its validation of the Referer header for cross-origin requests only when it believes the request is being served over TLS. It determines this by inspecting the r.URL.Scheme value. However, this value is never populated for "server" requests per the Go spec, and so this check does not run in practice. This vulnerability allows an attacker who has gained XSS on a subdomain or top level domain to perform authenticated form submissions against gorilla/csrf protected targets that share the same top level domain. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.7.2. |
| The /users endpoint in Statamic Core before 2.11.8 allows XSS to add an administrator user. This can be exploited via CSRF. Stored XSS can occur via a JavaScript payload in a username during account registration. Reflected XSS can occur via the /users PATH_INFO. |
| Permissive Cross-domain Policy with Untrusted Domains vulnerability in local API server of DestinyECM solution(versions described below) which is developed and maintained by Cyberdigm may allow Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attack, which probabilistically enables JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking) via forgery web page.* Due to product customization, version information may differ from the following version description. For further inquiries, please contact the vendor. |
| The Hostel plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.5.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation when managing rooms. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to create and delete rooms via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in Comtrend router WLD71-T1_v2.0.201820, affecting the GRG-4280us version. This vulnerability allows an attacker to force an end user to execute unwanted actions in a web application to which he is authenticated. |
| In Bitaxe ESP-Miner before 2.5.0 with AxeOS, one can use an /api/system CSRF attack to update the payout address (aka stratumUser) for a Bitaxe Bitcoin miner, or change the frequency and voltage settings. |
| The 5280 Bootstrap Modal Contact Form plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation in class-sbmm-list-table.php. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to bulk delete messages via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The Event post plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized bulk metadata update due to a missing nonce check on the save_bulkdatas function in all versions up to, and including, 5.9.10. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update post_meta_data via a forged request, granted they can trick a logged-in user into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The WordPress Header Builder Plugin – Pearl 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 or incorrect nonce validation on the stm_header_builder page. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary headers via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. |
| The SIP Calculator plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing nonce validation on a function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to 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. |
| Various Lexmark devices have CSRF that allows an attacker to modify the configuration of the device. |
| The wp-greet plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 6.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on a function. 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. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WP Hive Events Rich Snippets for Google allows Exploitation of Trusted Credentials.This issue affects Events Rich Snippets for Google: from n/a through 1.8. |
