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
4,167 results · Clear filters · Feed
-
Medium 6.5
PHPGurukul Hospital Management System v4.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the 'Add Docto…
-
Medium 6.5
Multiple vulnerabilities in IBM Java SDK affecting Db2 Recovery Expert for Linux, Unix and Windows
IBM DB2 Recovery Expert for LUW 5.5 Interim Fix 002 IBM Db2 Recovery Expert for Linux, UNIX and Windows is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the we…
-
Medium 6.5
Multiple Vulnerabilities in IBM Concert Software.
IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 2.1.0 for Z hub component is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts.
-
Medium 4.3
WP Quick Contact Us <= 1.0 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Settings Update
The WP Quick Contact Us 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 the settings update functionality. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attack…
-
Medium 4.3
MDirector Newsletter <= 4.5.8 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Plugin Settings Update
The MDirector Newsletter plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.8. This is due to missing nonce verification on the mdirectorNewsletterSave function. This makes it possible for unauthenticate…
-
Medium 4.3
LatePoint – Calendar Booking Plugin for Appointments and Events <= 5.2.5 - Cross-Site Request Forgery
The LatePoint – Calendar Booking Plugin for Appointments and Events plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 5.2.5. This is due to the 'call_by_route_name' function in the routing layer only valida…
-
Medium 4.3
SEATT: Simple Event Attendance <= 1.5.0 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Arbitrary Event Deletion
The SEATT: Simple Event Attendance plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.5.0. This is due to missing nonce validation on the event deletion functionality. This makes it possible for unauthenti…
-
Medium 6.9
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in FastGPT
FastGPT is an AI Agent building platform. Due to the fact that FastGPT's web page acquisition nodes, HTTP nodes, etc. need to initiate data acquisition requests from the server, there are certain security issues. In addition to implementing internal network i…
-
Medium 5.3
AVideo Platform 8.1 - Cross Site Request Forgery (Password Reset)
AVideo Platform 8.1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to reset user passwords by exploiting the password recovery mechanism. Attackers can craft malicious requests to the recoverPass endpoint using the user's recovery t…
-
Medium 4.0
FlexNet Publisher 11.12.1 - Cross-Site Request Forgery (Add Local Admin)
FlexNet Publisher 11.12.1 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to create administrative user accounts without authentication. Attackers can craft a malicious HTML form to trick authenticated users into submitting a request…
-
Medium 6.5
Inappropriate implementation in Animation in Google Chrome prior to 145.0.7632.45 allowed a remote attacker to leak cro…
-
Medium 4.3
MMA Call Tracking <= 2.3.15 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Plugin Settings Update
The MMA Call Tracking plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.3.15. This is due to missing nonce validation when saving plugin configuration on the `mma_call_tracking_menu` admin page. This make…
-
Medium 5.7
Kanboard Affected by Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via Content-Type Misconfiguration in Project Role Assignment
Kanboard is project management software focused on Kanban methodology. Prior to 1.2.50, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the ProjectPermissionController within the Kanboard application. The application fails to strictly enforce the …
-
Medium 5.9
unity-cli Exposes Plaintext Credentials in Debug Logs (sign-package command)
unity-cli is a command line utility for the Unity Game Engine. Prior to 1.8.2 , the sign-package command in @rage-against-the-pixel/unity-cli logs sensitive credentials in plaintext when the --verbose flag is used. Command-line arguments including --email and…
-
Medium 6.3
A vulnerability has been found in FAST/TOOLS provided by Yokogawa Electric Corporation. This product is vulnerable to C…
-
Medium 4.3
TITLE ANIMATOR <= 1.0 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Settings Update
The TITLE ANIMATOR 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 the settings page form handler in `inc/settings-page.php`. This makes it possible for una…
-
Medium 4.3
Wing FTP Server < 6.2.7 - Cross-site Request Forgery
Wing FTP Server versions prior to 6.2.7 contain a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the web administration interface that allows attackers to delete admin users. Attackers can craft a malicious HTML page with a hidden form to submit a request…
-
Medium 5.3
Business Live Chat Software 1.0 - Cross-Site Request Forgery (Add Admin)
Business Live Chat Software 1.0 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to change user account roles without authentication. Attackers can craft a malicious HTML form to modify user privileges by submitting a POST request to …
-
Medium 4.3
Code Snippets <= 3.9.4 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Cloud Snippet Download/Update Actions
The Code Snippets plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.9.4. This is due to missing nonce validation on the cloud snippet download and update actions in the Cloud_Search_List_Table class. This…
-
Medium 4.3
HRSALE 1.1.8 - Cross-Site Request Forgery (Add Admin)
HRSALE 1.1.8 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to add unauthorized administrative users through the employee registration form. Attackers can craft a malicious HTML page with hidden form fields to trick authenticated ad…
-
Medium 5.3
Exagate Sysguard 6001 - Cross-Site Request Forgery (Add Admin)
Exagate SYSGuard 6001 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to create unauthorized admin accounts through a crafted HTML form. Attackers can trick users into submitting a malicious form to /kulyon.php that adds a new user w…
-
Medium 4.3
IBM Operations Analytics - Log Analysis is affected by CSRF Token Replay Attack
IBM Operations Analytics – Log Analysis versions 1.3.5.0 through 1.3.8.3 and IBM SmartCloud Analytics – Log Analysis are vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability that could allow an attacker to trick a trusted user into performing unaut…
-
Medium 4.3
lcg0124 BootDo cross-site request forgery
A vulnerability was identified in lcg0124 BootDo up to e93dd428ef6f5c881aa74d49a2099ab0cf1e0fcb. This affects an unknown part. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit is publicly ava…
-
Medium 5.3
Edimax EW-7438RPn - Cross-Site Request Forgery (MAC Filtering)
Edimax EW-7438RPn 1.13 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability in the MAC filtering configuration interface. Attackers can craft malicious web pages to trick users into adding unauthorized MAC addresses to the device's filtering rules without thei…
-
Medium 5.3
Maian Support Helpdesk 4.3 - Cross-Site Request Forgery (Add Admin)
Maian Support Helpdesk 4.3 contains a cross-site request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers to create administrative accounts without authentication. Attackers can craft malicious HTML forms to add admin users and upload PHP files with unrestricted f…
-
Medium 5.9
Qwik City has a CSRF Protection Bypass via Content-Type Header Validation
Qwik is a performance focused javascript framework. Prior to version 1.19.0, Qwik City’s server-side request handler inconsistently interprets HTTP request headers, which can be abused by a remote attacker to circumvent form submission CSRF protections using …
-
Medium 5.9
[qwik-city] CSRF protection middleware does not work properly for content type header with parameters (eg. multipart/form-data)
Qwik is a performance focused javascript framework. Prior to version 1.12.0, a typo in the regular expression within isContentType causes incorrect parsing of certain Content-Type headers. This issue has been patched in version 1.12.0.
-
Medium 5.1
Tenda AC7 Web Interface Lacks CSRF Protections for Admin Actions
Shenzhen Tenda AC7 firmware version V03.03.03.01_cn and prior does not implement CSRF protections for administrative functions in the web management interface. The interface does not enforce anti-CSRF tokens or robust origin validation, which can allow an att…
-
Medium 6.5
Open eClass is Vulnerable to CSRF in Teacher-Restricted Endpoints Allows Unauthorized Actions
The Open eClass platform (formerly known as GUnet eClass) is a complete course management system. Prior to version 4.2, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in multiple teacher-restricted endpoints allows attackers to induce authenticated teacher…
-
Medium 5.4
WordPress ThirstyAffiliates plugin <= 3.11.9 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Blair Williams ThirstyAffiliates thirstyaffiliates allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects ThirstyAffiliates: from n/a through <= 3.11.9.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress UsersWP plugin <= 1.2.53 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Stiofan UsersWP userswp allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects UsersWP: from n/a through <= 1.2.53.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Enter Addons plugin <= 2.3.2 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in themelooks Enter Addons enteraddons allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Enter Addons: from n/a through <= 2.3.2.
-
Medium 5.4
WordPress Simple Membership WP user Import plugin <= 1.9.1 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in wp.insider Simple Membership WP user Import simple-membership-wp-user-import allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Simple Membership WP user Import: from n/a through <= 1.9.1.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Sigmize plugin <= 0.0.9 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Brainstorm Force Sigmize sigmize allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Sigmize: from n/a through <= 0.0.9.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Copyscape Premium plugin <= 1.4.1 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Copyscape Copyscape Premium copyscape-premium allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Copyscape Premium: from n/a through <= 1.4.1.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress WpEvently plugin <= 5.1.1 - Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in magepeopleteam WpEvently mage-eventpress allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects WpEvently: from n/a through <= 5.1.1.
-
Medium 4.3
Cross-site request forgery vulnerability exists in ELECOM wireless LAN products. If a user accesses a malicious page wh…
-
Medium 5.4
Mail Mint <= 1.19.2 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Stored Cross-Site Scripting
The Mail Mint plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.19.2. This is due to missing nonce validation on the create_or_update_note function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to…
-
Medium 4.6
Tuleap is missing CSRF protection in the Overview inconsistent items
Tuleap is an Open Source Suite for management of software development and collaboration. Tuleap is missing CSRF protection in the Overview inconsistent items. An attacker could use this vulnerability to trick victims into repairing inconsistent items (creatin…
-
Medium 4.3
Five Star Restaurant Reservations < 2.7.9 - Arbitrary Bookings Deletion via CSRF
The Five Star Restaurant Reservations WordPress plugin before 2.7.9 does not have CSRF checks in some bulk actions, which could allow attackers to make logged in admins perform unwanted actions, such as deleting bookings via CSRF attacks.