Admin Menu Manager Plugin up to 1.0.3 on WordPress cross-site request forgery
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 4.2 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in Admin Menu Manager Plugin up to 1.0.3 on WordPress. This affects an unknown function. This manipulation causes cross-site request forgery. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer. This vulnerability appears as CVE-2025-26925. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.
Details
A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in Admin Menu Manager Plugin up to 1.0.3 on WordPress. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cross-site request forgery vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-352. 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. As an impact it is known to affect integrity. The summary by CVE is:
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Required Admin Menu Manager allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Admin Menu Manager: from n/a through 1.0.3.
The weakness was presented by Nguyen Thi Huyen Trang. The advisory is shared at patchstack.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2025-26925 since 02/17/2025. The exploitation appears to be easy. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploitation doesn't need any form of authentication. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available.
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at EUVD (EUVD-2025-5343). If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Name
Version
Support
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.3VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.2
VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 4.2
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 4.3
CNA Vector (Patchstack): 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Cross-site request forgeryCWE: CWE-352 / CWE-862 / CWE-863
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Timeline
02/17/2025 🔍02/26/2025 🔍
02/26/2025 🔍
04/23/2026 🔍
Sources
Advisory: patchstack.comResearcher: Nguyen Thi Huyen Trang
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2025-26925 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-26925
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-297613
EUVD: 🔍
Entry
Created: 02/26/2025 15:15Updated: 04/23/2026 19:29
Changes: 02/26/2025 15:15 (64), 04/23/2026 19:29 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.