Weakness (CWE)
CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
How to prevent it (7 mitigations)
-
Architecture and Design
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]
Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
-
Implementation
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
-
Architecture and Design
Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]
-
Architecture and Design
Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.
-
Architecture and Design
Use the "double-submitted cookie" method as described by Felten and Zeller:
When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user's machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same.
Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult.
This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
-
Architecture and Design
Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.
-
Implementation
Check the HTTP Referer header to see if the request originated from an expected page. This could break legitimate functionality, because users or proxies may have disabled sending the Referer for privacy reasons.
Source: MITRE CWE-352
2,042 results · Clear filters · Feed
-
High 8.8
DedeCMS v5.7 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /dede/mychannel_edit.php.
-
High 8.8
DedeCMS v5.7 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via the component /dede/articl…
-
High 7.4
FlyCms v1.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via the /system/share/ztree_cat…
-
High 8.1
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Tunis Soft "Product Designer" (productdesigner) module for PrestaSh…
-
High 8.8
Stupid Simple CMS v1.2.4 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via /update-article.php.
-
High 7.1
WordPress Ajax Search Lite Plugin <= 4.11.4 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Ernest Marcinko Ajax Search Lite allows Reflected XSS.This issue affects Ajax Search Lite: from n/a through 4.11.4.
-
High 8.8
Dedecms v5.7.112 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in the file manager.
-
High 8.8
Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in SMA Cluster Controller
Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability in SMA Cluster Controller, affecting version 01.05.01.R. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to send a malicious link to an authenticated user to perform actions with these user permissions on the affected devic…
-
High 8.8
Bagisto Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerability
Cross Site Request Forgery vulnerability in Bagisto before v.1.5.1 allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via a crafted HTML script.
-
High 8.8
Flusity-CMS v2.33 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /cover/addons/info_me…
-
High 8.8
flusity-CMS v2.33 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /core/tools/update_co…
-
High 8.8
flusity-CMS v2.33 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /core/tools/add_place…
-
High 7.1
WordPress PowerPack Pro for Elementor Plugin < 2.10.8 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in PowerPack Addons for Elementor PowerPack Pro for Elementor.This issue affects PowerPack Pro for Elementor: from n/a before 2.10.8.
-
High 8.8
Liferay Portal and Liferay DXP Vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in Terms of Use Page
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the terms of use page in Liferay Portal before 7.3.6, and Liferay DXP 7.3 before service pack 1, 7.2 before fix pack 11 allows remote attackers to accept the site's terms of use via social engineering and ent…
-
High 8.8
flusity-CMS v2.33 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /core/tools/delete_me…
-
High 8.8
flusity-CMS v2.33 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /core/tools/add_trans…
-
High 8.8
flusity-CMS v2.33 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /core/tools/update_me…
-
High 8.3
Icinga Director configuration is susceptible to Cross-Site Request Forgery
Icinga Director is a tool designed to make Icinga 2 configuration handling easy. Not any of Icinga Director's configuration forms used to manipulate the monitoring environment are protected against cross site request forgery (CSRF). It enables attackers to pe…
-
High 8.8
Multiple Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) chaining in NCR Terminal Handler v.1.5.1 allows privileges to be escalated b…
-
High 8.2
A vulnerability in the SOAP API of Cisco Expressway Series and Cisco TelePresence Video Communication Server could allo…
-
High 8.0
Westermo Lynx 206-F2G Cross-Site Request Forgery
The cross-site request forgery token in the request may be predictable or easily guessable allowing attackers to craft a malicious request, which could be triggered by a victim unknowingly. In a successful CSRF attack, the attacker could lead the victim user …
-
High 7.1
Index Now <= 2.6.3 - Cross-Site Request Forgery via reset_form
The Index Now plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.6.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the 'reset_form' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers…
-
High 8.8
Cross Site Request Forgery vulnerability in flusity-CMS v.2.33 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via t…
-
High 7.5
Privilege escalation through CSRF attack on 'setup.pl'
LedgerSMB is a free web-based double-entry accounting system. When a LedgerSMB database administrator has an active session in /setup.pl, an attacker can trick the admin into clicking on a link which automatically submits a request to setup.pl without the adm…
-
High 8.8
Cross Site Request Forgery in National Keep's CyberMath
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in National Keep Cyber Security Services CyberMath allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects CyberMath: from v1.4 before v1.5.
-
High 8.8
Cross Site Request Forgery vulnerability in flusity-CMS v.2.33 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via t…
-
High 8.8
Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in flusity-CMS v.2.33, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary cod…
-
High 8.8
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in livewire before v3.0.4, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary…
-
High 8.8CVE-2024-22939 Public exploit
Cross Site Request Forgery vulnerability in FlyCms v.1.0 allows a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via the sys…
-
High 8.8
WordPress Profile Builder Pro Plugin <= 3.10.0 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Cozmoslabs Profile Builder Pro.This issue affects Profile Builder Pro: from n/a through 3.10.0.
-
High 7.1
WordPress Better Anchor Links Plugin <= 1.7.5 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Luděk Melichar Better Anchor Links allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS).This issue affects Better Anchor Links: from n/a through 1.7.5.
-
High 7.1
WordPress Custom Dashboard Widgets Plugin <= 1.3.1 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in AboZain,O7abeeb,UnitOne Custom Dashboard Widgets allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS).This issue affects Custom Dashboard Widgets: from n/a through 1.3.1.
-
High 8.8
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in NCR Terminal Handler v.1.5.1 leads to a one-click account takeover. This is achiev…
-
High 8.4
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in github.com/argoproj/argo-cd
Argo CD is a declarative, GitOps continuous delivery tool for Kubernetes. The Argo CD API prior to versions 2.10-rc2, 2.9.4, 2.8.8, and 2.7.15 are vulnerable to a cross-server request forgery (CSRF) attack when the attacker has the ability to write HTML to a …
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/email/email_conf_updagte
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/score/scorerule_save
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/email/email_templets_update.
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/score/del.
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/admin/add_group_save
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via /system/admin/update_group_save.