Loc Bui payOS Plugin up to 1.0.61 on WordPress cross-site request forgery
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 4.8 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Loc Bui payOS Plugin up to 1.0.61 on WordPress. This issue affects some unknown processing. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. This vulnerability is listed as CVE-2025-57946. The attack may be initiated remotely. There is no available exploit.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Loc Bui payOS Plugin up to 1.0.61 on WordPress and classified as problematic. This issue affects some unknown processing. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cross-site request forgery vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to 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. Impacted is integrity. The summary by CVE is:
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Loc Bui payOS allows Cross Site Request Forgery. This issue affects payOS: from n/a through 1.0.61.
The weakness was presented by Nabil Irawan. The advisory is shared at patchstack.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2025-57946 since 08/22/2025. The exploitation is known to be easy. The attack may be initiated remotely. No form of authentication is needed for a successful exploitation. 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.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
- 1.0.0
- 1.0.1
- 1.0.2
- 1.0.3
- 1.0.4
- 1.0.5
- 1.0.6
- 1.0.7
- 1.0.8
- 1.0.9
- 1.0.10
- 1.0.11
- 1.0.12
- 1.0.13
- 1.0.14
- 1.0.15
- 1.0.16
- 1.0.17
- 1.0.18
- 1.0.19
- 1.0.20
- 1.0.21
- 1.0.22
- 1.0.23
- 1.0.24
- 1.0.25
- 1.0.26
- 1.0.27
- 1.0.28
- 1.0.29
- 1.0.30
- 1.0.31
- 1.0.32
- 1.0.33
- 1.0.34
- 1.0.35
- 1.0.36
- 1.0.37
- 1.0.38
- 1.0.39
- 1.0.40
- 1.0.41
- 1.0.42
- 1.0.43
- 1.0.44
- 1.0.45
- 1.0.46
- 1.0.47
- 1.0.48
- 1.0.49
- 1.0.50
- 1.0.51
- 1.0.52
- 1.0.53
- 1.0.54
- 1.0.55
- 1.0.56
- 1.0.57
- 1.0.58
- 1.0.59
- 1.0.60
- 1.0.61
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.8VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.8
VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 4.2
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 5.4
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
08/22/2025 CVE reserved09/22/2025 Advisory disclosed
09/22/2025 VulDB entry created
09/22/2025 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Advisory: patchstack.comResearcher: Nabil Irawan
Status: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2025-57946 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-57946
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-325373
Entry
Created: 09/22/2025 21:25Changes: 09/22/2025 21:25 (64)
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.