百度分享按钮 Plugin up to 1.0.6 on WordPress Setting cross-site request forgery

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
4.2$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability has been found in 百度分享按钮 Plugin up to 1.0.6 on WordPress and classified as problematic. This affects an unknown function of the component Setting Handler. This manipulation causes cross-site request forgery. This vulnerability appears as CVE-2025-48320. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in 百度分享按钮 Plugin up to 1.0.6 on WordPress. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown part of the component Setting Handler. 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 advisory is shared at wordfence.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2025-48320. 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-2025-26039). If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Type

Name

Version

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.2

VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 4.2
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Cross-site request forgery
CWE: 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-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: no mitigation known
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔒

Timelineinfo

08/25/2025 Advisory disclosed
08/25/2025 +0 days VulDB entry created
08/28/2025 +3 days VulDB entry last update

Sourcesinfo

Advisory: wordfence.com
Status: Not defined

CVE: CVE-2025-48320 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-48320
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-321373
EUVD: 🔒

Entryinfo

Created: 08/25/2025 19:53
Updated: 08/28/2025 22:08
Changes: 08/25/2025 19:53 (51), 08/28/2025 22:08 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

◂ PreviousOverviewNext ▸

Interested in the pricing of exploits?

See the underground prices here!