← Back
CWE-352

9,881 CVEs • Abstraction: Compound • Likelihood of Exploit: Medium

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

The web application does not, or can not, sufficiently verify whether a well-formed, valid, consistent request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (9,881)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The auto making JSON-LD plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the amJL_certification functio...Show more
The auto making JSON-LD plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the amJL_certification function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's license key option, and subsequently trigger license validation and pro feature installation on the victim site without the administrator's consent via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. Successful exploitation can trigger downstream calls to amJL_is_license_valid() and amJL_download_and_install_pro_features(), meaning the impact extends beyond a simple settings change to unauthorized installation of plugin components.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
6.1 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The WP AutoBuzz plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on a function. This makes it possible for...Show more
The WP AutoBuzz plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.1. 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. This vulnerability bypasses WordPress's DISALLOW_UNFILTERED_HTML protection because the unsanitized value is written directly via update_option at the plugin level, entirely outside of WordPress post content handling.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The Two-factor authentication (formerly IP Vault) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the ip...Show more
The Two-factor authentication (formerly IP Vault) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the ipv_save_changes function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to modify the plugin's firewall and two-factor authentication settings — including the operating mode, request include/exclude rules, authentication slug, and log retention period — potentially disabling protection entirely via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The Genzel breadcrumbs plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the _options_page function. This...Show more
The Genzel breadcrumbs plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.2. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the _options_page function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's breadcrumb configuration, including templates, delimiter, home label, home URI, and breadcrumb rules via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.Show less
-
-
Jun 17, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The Old Posts Highlighter plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the OPH_options function. Th...Show more
The Old Posts Highlighter plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the OPH_options function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's configuration settings without authorization via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
The CM Ad Changer – A simple tool to control and optimize your site's banners plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.7. This is due to missing or incorr...Show more
The CM Ad Changer – A simple tool to control and optimize your site's banners plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.7. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the cmac_campaigns_action function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to permanently delete arbitrary advertising campaigns, including their associated banner records and uploaded files via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.Show less
-
-
Jul 24, 2026
May 26, 2026
2.1 LOW· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
5.0 MEDIUM· v2
A security flaw has been discovered in SourceCodester CET Automated Grading System with AI Predictive Analytics 1.0. This affects an unknown function. Performing a manipulation results in cross-site request forgery. The...Show more
A security flaw has been discovered in SourceCodester CET Automated Grading System with AI Predictive Analytics 1.0. This affects an unknown function. Performing a manipulation results in cross-site request forgery. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.Show less
1Joomla
1Joomla
Jul 20, 2026
May 26, 2026
4.6 MEDIUM· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Lack of CSRF token validation lead to a CSRF attack vector in the admin activation endpoint of com_users.
-
-
Jul 24, 2026
May 26, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
e107 is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 2.3.5, e107 CMS does not properly enforce CSRF token validation on comment moderation actions. The problem comes down to how session_handler::check() handles CSRF token...Show more
e107 is a content management system (CMS). Prior to 2.3.5, e107 CMS does not properly enforce CSRF token validation on comment moderation actions. The problem comes down to how session_handler::check() handles CSRF tokens. Instead of requiring a token on every state-changing request, it only validates the token if one happens to be present. If there is no token at all, the check is skipped entirely. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.3.5.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 26, 2026
N/A· v4
5.7 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Zohocorp Zoho Mail wordpress plugin is vulnerable to Cross-Site request forgery (CSRF). This issue affects Zoho Mail wordpress plugin versions before 1.6.2.
-
-
Jul 24, 2026
May 25, 2026
N/A· v4
7.1 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in bgermann CformsII allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects CformsII: from n/a through 15.1.3.
-
-
Jul 24, 2026
May 25, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Convers Lab WPSubscription allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects WPSubscription: from n/a through 1.9.1.
-
-
Jul 24, 2026
May 25, 2026
N/A· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WpDevArt Organization chart allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects Organization chart: from n/a through 1.7.5.
-
-
Jul 24, 2026
May 25, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Recorp Export WP Page to Static HTML/CSS allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects Export WP Page to Static HTML/CSS: from n/a through 6.0.0.
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 25, 2026
2.1 LOW· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
5.0 MEDIUM· v2
A security flaw has been discovered in SourceCodester Student Grades Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown part. The manipulation results in cross-site request forgery. The attack can be executed remotely. The e...Show more
A security flaw has been discovered in SourceCodester Student Grades Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown part. The manipulation results in cross-site request forgery. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 25, 2026
6.9 MEDIUM· v4
5.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Admidio 3.3.5 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows low-privilege users to increase their permissions by exploiting improper origin checking. Attackers can craft malicious HTML forms targeting r...Show more
Admidio 3.3.5 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows low-privilege users to increase their permissions by exploiting improper origin checking. Attackers can craft malicious HTML forms targeting roles_function.php with parameters like rol_assign_roles, rol_approve_users, and rol_edit_user set to 1 to escalate privileges without authentication.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 25, 2026
5.3 MEDIUM· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Twitter-Clone 1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to force victims to delete posts by crafting malicious HTML forms. Attackers can create hidden forms targeting tweetdel.php...Show more
Twitter-Clone 1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to force victims to delete posts by crafting malicious HTML forms. Attackers can create hidden forms targeting tweetdel.php with tweet IDs and automatically submit them to delete arbitrary posts from authenticated user sessions.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 23, 2026
5.3 MEDIUM· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Joomla Component jomres 9.11.2 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to modify user account information by tricking authenticated users into visiting malicious pages. Attackers can cra...Show more
Joomla Component jomres 9.11.2 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to modify user account information by tricking authenticated users into visiting malicious pages. Attackers can craft HTML forms targeting the account/index endpoint with hidden fields to change passwords, email addresses, and profile details without user consent.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 23, 2026
5.3 MEDIUM· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Smartshop 1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to modify user profiles by tricking authenticated users into submitting malicious requests. Attackers can craft HTML forms targeting e...Show more
Smartshop 1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to modify user profiles by tricking authenticated users into submitting malicious requests. Attackers can craft HTML forms targeting editprofile.php with hidden fields for email and password parameters that execute automatically when visited by an authenticated admin user.Show less
-
-
Jul 23, 2026
May 23, 2026
2.1 LOW· v4
4.3 MEDIUM· v3
5.0 MEDIUM· v2
A vulnerability was identified in calcom cal.diy up to 4.9.4. Impacted is an unknown function. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly...Show more
A vulnerability was identified in calcom cal.diy up to 4.9.4. Impacted is an unknown function. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.Show less