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
6,780 results · Feed
-
Critical 9.7CVE-2024-22416 Public exploit
Cross-Site Request Forgery on any API call in pyLoad may lead to admin privilege escalation
pyLoad is a free and open-source Download Manager written in pure Python. The `pyload` API allows any API call to be made using GET requests. Since the session cookie is not set to `SameSite: strict`, this opens the library up to severe attack possibilities v…
-
High 7.1
WordPress 3D Tag Cloud Plugin <= 3.8 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Vinoj Cardoza 3D Tag Cloud allows Stored XSS.This issue affects 3D Tag Cloud: from n/a through 3.8.
-
High 8.8
Stupid Simple CMS <=1.2.4 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /admin-edit.p…
-
Medium 5.4
Vulnerability in the Oracle iSupport product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Internal Operations). Supported ver…
-
Medium 6.1
Vulnerability in the Oracle Knowledge Management product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Create, Update, Authori…
-
Medium 6.1
Vulnerability in the Oracle Complex Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul product of Oracle Supply Chain (component: LOV). …
-
Medium 6.1
Vulnerability in the Oracle Installed Base product of Oracle E-Business Suite (component: Engineering Change Order). Su…
-
Medium 4.6
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability on WIC1200
A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability has been found on WIC1200, affecting version 1.1. An authenticated user could lead another user into executing unwanted actions inside the application they are logged in. This vulnerability is possible due to …
-
Medium 4.3
Allegro RomPager HTTP POST Request cross-site request forgery
A vulnerability was found in Allegro RomPager 4.01. It has been classified as problematic. Affected is an unknown function of the file usertable.htm?action=delete of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. The manipulation of the argument username leads to c…
-
High 8.8
Verydows v2.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /protected/controller/bac…
-
Medium 6.5
EventON - WordPress Virtual Event Calendar Plugin Pro <= 4.5.4 & Free <= 2.2.7 - Cross-Site Request Forgery via evo_eventpost_update_meta
The EventON - WordPress Virtual Event Calendar Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.4 (for Pro) & 2.2.7 (for Free). This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the evo_ev…
-
Medium 6.5
EventON - WordPress Virtual Event Calendar Plugin <= 4.5.4 (Pro) & <= 2.2.8 (Free) - Cross-Site Request Forgery via save_virtual_event_settings
The EventON - WordPress Virtual Event Calendar Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.4 (Pro) & 2.2.8 (Free). This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the save_virtual_e…
-
Medium 5.4
GiveWP <= 2.33.3 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to plugin deactivation
The GiveWP plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 2.33.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the give_sendwp_disconnect function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attac…
-
Medium 4.3
GiveWP <= 2.33.3 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to plugin installation
The GiveWP plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 2.33.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the give_sendwp_remote_install_handler function. This makes it possible for unauthent…
-
Low 3.1
My Sticky Bar <= 2.6.6 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Sensitive Information Exposure
The My Sticky Bar plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.6.6. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation in mystickymenu-contact-leads.php. This makes it possible for unauthenticated …
-
Medium 5.4
GiveWP <= 2.33.3 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Stripe Integration Deletion
The GiveWP plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 2.33.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the give_stripe_disconnect_connect_stripe_account function. This makes it possible fo…
-
Medium 4.3
WP 2FA – Two-factor authentication for WordPress <= 2.5.0 - Cross-Site Request Forgery
The WP 2FA – Two-factor authentication for WordPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.5.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the send_backup_codes_email function. Th…
-
High 8.8
WP Register Profile With Shortcode <= 3.5.9 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to User Password Reset
The WP Register Profile With Shortcode plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 3.5.9. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the update_password_validate function. This makes it possi…
-
Medium 5.5
The vulnerability allows a remote attacker to delete arbitrary files on the file system via a crafted URL or HTTP reque…
-
Medium 6.5
Ipa: invalid csrf protection
A Cross-site request forgery vulnerability exists in ipa/session/login_password in all supported versions of IPA. This flaw allows an attacker to trick the user into submitting a request that could perform actions as the user, resulting in a loss of confident…
-
Medium 5.4
Metform Elementor Contact Form Builder <= 3.8.1 - Cross-Site Request Forgery
The Metform Elementor Contact Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.8.1. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the contents function. This makes it possible for …
-
High 8.3
An issue was discovered in savignano S/Notify before 2.0.1 for Bitbucket. While an administrative user is logged on, th…
-
High 8.3
An issue was discovered in savignano S/Notify before 4.0.2 for Confluence. While an administrative user is logged on, t…
-
High 8.3
An issue was discovered in savignano S/Notify before 4.0.2 for Jira. While an administrative user is logged on, the con…
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress JS & CSS Script Optimizer Plugin <= 0.3.3 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Yevhen Kotelnytskyi JS & CSS Script Optimizer.This issue affects JS & CSS Script Optimizer: from n/a through 0.3.3.
-
Critical 9.6
WordPress ARMember Plugin <= 4.0.22 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) leading to PHP Object Injection
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF), Deserialization of Untrusted Data vulnerability in Repute Infosystems ARMember – Membership Plugin, Content Restriction, Member Levels, User Profile & User signup.This issue affects ARMember – Membership Plugin, Content Rest…
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress WooCommerce Plugin <= 8.2.2 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Automattic WooCommerce.This issue affects WooCommerce: from n/a through 8.2.2.
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /system/site/config_footer_…
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /system/site/userconfig_upd…
-
High 8.8
FlyCms v1.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component system/site/webconfig_updag…
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Doofinder for WooCommerce Plugin <= 2.0.33 is vulnerable to Broken Access Control
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Doofinder Doofinder WP & WooCommerce Search.This issue affects Doofinder WP & WooCommerce Search: from n/a through 2.0.33.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Spam protection, AntiSpam, FireWall by CleanTalk Plugin <= 6.20 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in СleanTalk - Anti-Spam Protection Spam protection, Anti-Spam, FireWall by CleanTalk.This issue affects Spam protection, Anti-Spam, FireWall by CleanTalk: from n/a through 6.20.
-
Medium 5.4
WordPress Stylish Price List Plugin <= 7.0.17 is vulnerable to Broken Access Control
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Designful Stylish Price List – Price Table Builder & QR Code Restaurant Menu.This issue affects Stylish Price List – Price Table Builder & QR Code Restaurant Menu: from n/a through 7.0.17.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Inline Image Upload for BBPress Plugin <= 1.1.18 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in WP Zone Inline Image Upload for BBPress.This issue affects Inline Image Upload for BBPress: from n/a through 1.1.18.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Awesome Support Plugin <= 6.1.5 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Awesome Support Team Awesome Support – WordPress HelpDesk & Support Plugin.This issue affects Awesome Support – WordPress HelpDesk & Support Plugin: from n/a through 6.1.5.
-
Medium 5.4
WordPress Apollo13 Framework Extensions Plugin <= 1.9.1 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Apollo13Themes Apollo13 Framework Extensions.This issue affects Apollo13 Framework Extensions: from n/a through 1.9.1.
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Icegram Plugin <= 3.1.18 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Icegram Icegram Engage – WordPress Lead Generation, Popup Builder, CTA, Optins and Email List Building.This issue affects Icegram Engage – WordPress Lead Generation, Popup Builder, CTA, Optins and Email List …
-
Medium 5.4
WordPress NEX-Forms – Ultimate Form Builder Plugin <= 8.5.2 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Basix NEX-Forms – Ultimate Form Builder – Contact forms and much more.This issue affects NEX-Forms – Ultimate Form Builder – Contact forms and much more: from n/a through 8.5.2.
-
Medium 5.4
WordPress NitroPack Plugin <= 1.10.2 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in NitroPack Inc. NitroPack – Cache & Speed Optimization for Core Web Vitals, Defer CSS & JavaScript, Lazy load Images.This issue affects NitroPack – Cache & Speed Optimization for Core Web Vitals, Defer CSS & J…
-
Medium 4.3
WordPress Simple Job Board Plugin <= 2.10.6 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in PressTigers Simple Job Board.This issue affects Simple Job Board: from n/a through 2.10.6.