CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
The xpinner-lite plugin through 2.2 for WordPress has wp-admin/options-general.php CSRF with resultant XSS. |
The users-ultra plugin before 1.5.63 for WordPress has CSRF via action=package_add_new to wp-admin/admin-ajax.php. |
The mtouch-quiz plugin before 3.1.3 for WordPress has wp-admin/edit.php CSRF with resultant XSS. |
The mtouch-quiz plugin before 3.1.3 for WordPress has wp-admin/options-general.php CSRF. |
The photo-gallery plugin before 1.2.42 for WordPress has CSRF. |
The wp-rollback plugin before 1.2.3 for WordPress has CSRF. |
The uninstall plugin before 1.2 for WordPress has CSRF to delete all tables via the wp-admin/admin-ajax.php?action=uninstall URI. |
The erident-custom-login-and-dashboard plugin before 3.5 for WordPress has CSRF. |
6kbbs 7.1 and 8.0 allows CSRF via portalchannel_ajax.php (id or code parameter) or admin.php (fileids parameter). |
The request phase of the OmniAuth Ruby gem (1.9.1 and earlier) is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery when used as part of the Ruby on Rails framework, allowing accounts to be connected without user intent, user interaction, or feedback to the user. This permits a secondary account to be able to sign into the web application as the primary account. |
MITRE is populating this ID because it was assigned prior to Lenovo becoming a CNA. A vulnerability was discovered (fixed and publicly disclosed in 2015) in Lenovo Solution Center (LSC) prior to version 3.3.002 that could allow cross-site request forgery. |
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the login form in Zimbra Collaboration Suite (aka ZCS) before 8.6.0 Patch 10, 8.7.x before 8.7.11 Patch 2, and 8.8.x before 8.8.8 Patch 1 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of unspecified victims by leveraging failure to use a CSRF token. |
Parts of the Puppet Enterprise Console 3.x were found to be susceptible to clickjacking and CSRF (Cross-Site Request Forgery) attacks. This would allow an attacker to redirect user input to an untrusted site or hijack a user session. |
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in admin.php in Zenphoto before 1.4.9 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of admin users for requests that may cause a denial of service (resource consumption). |
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the Private Only plugin 3.5.1 for WordPress allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that (1) add users, (2) delete posts, or (3) modify PHP files via unspecified vectors, or (4) conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via the po_logo parameter in the privateonly.php page to wp-admin/options-general.php. |
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Koha 3.14.x before 3.14.16, 3.16.x before 3.16.12, 3.18.x before 3.18.08, and 3.20.x before 3.20.1 allow remote attackers to (1) hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that create a user via a request to members/memberentry.pl or (2) give a user superlibrarian permission via a request to members/member-flags.pl or (3) hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via the addshelf parameter to opac-shelves.pl. |
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the Codestyling Localization plugin 1.99.30 and earlier for Wordpress. |
Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in Synametrics Technologies SynaMan before 3.5 Build 1451, Syncrify before 3.7 Build 856, and SynTail before 1.5 Build 567 |
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the xmlrpc.cgi service in IBM QRadar SIEM 7.1 before MR2 Patch 11 Interim Fix 02 and 7.2.x before 7.2.5 Patch 4 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that insert XSS sequences via vectors related to webmin. IBM X-Force ID: 103921. |
The ClickBank Affiliate Ads WordPress plugin through 1.20 does not have CSRF check when saving its settings, allowing attacker to make logged in admin change them via a CSRF attack. Furthermore, due to the lack of escaping when they are outputting, it could also lead to Stored Cross-Site Scripting issues |