Code Work Web Xews Lite Plugin up to 1.0.9 on WordPress filename control
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 6.1 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability marked as problematic has been reported in Code Work Web Xews Lite Plugin up to 1.0.9 on WordPress. The impacted element is an unknown function. Performing a manipulation results in filename control. This vulnerability was named CVE-2025-39383. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.
Details
A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in Code Work Web Xews Lite Plugin up to 1.0.9 on WordPress. This affects an unknown code. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a filename control vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-98. The PHP application receives input from an upstream component, but it does not restrict or incorrectly restricts the input before its usage in "require," "include," or similar functions. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
Improper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') vulnerability in Code Work Web Xews Lite allows PHP Local File Inclusion. This issue affects Xews Lite: from n/a through 1.0.9.
The weakness was presented by Dimas Maulana. The advisory is shared at patchstack.com. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2025-39383 since 04/16/2025. The exploitability is told to be difficult. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. No form of authentication is needed for exploitation. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 04/24/2025).
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 6.2VulDB Meta Temp Score: 6.1
VulDB Base Score: 5.0
VulDB Temp Score: 4.8
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 7.5
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: Filename controlCWE: CWE-98
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
04/16/2025 🔍04/24/2025 🔍
04/24/2025 🔍
04/24/2025 🔍
Sources
Advisory: patchstack.comResearcher: Dimas Maulana
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2025-39383 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-39383
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-306093
Entry
Created: 04/24/2025 20:32Changes: 04/24/2025 20:32 (63)
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.