Trust Reviews Plugin for Google, Tripadvisor, Yelp, Airbnb and other Platforms Plugin feed_save cross-site request forgery
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 5.1 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability marked as problematic has been reported in Trust Reviews Plugin for Google, Tripadvisor, Yelp, Airbnb and other Platforms Plugin up to 1.0 on WordPress. Impacted is the function feed_save. This manipulation causes cross-site request forgery.
This vulnerability is registered as CVE-2025-9899. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. No exploit is available.
Details
A vulnerability has been found in Trust Reviews Plugin for Google, Tripadvisor, Yelp, Airbnb and other Platforms Plugin up to 1.0 on WordPress and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function feed_save. 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:
The Trust Reviews plugin for Google, Tripadvisor, Yelp, Airbnb and other platforms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the feed_save function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to create or modify feed entries via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
It is possible to read the advisory at wordfence.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2025-9899. 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. Technical details of the vulnerability are known, but there is no available exploit.
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-2025-31413). Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
Product
Type
Name
Version
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 5.2VulDB Meta Temp Score: 5.1
VulDB Base Score: 4.3
VulDB Temp Score: 4.2
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 6.1
CNA Vector: 🔒
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
09/26/2025 Advisory disclosed09/26/2025 VulDB entry created
09/27/2025 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Advisory: wordfence.comStatus: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2025-9899 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2025-9899
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-326155
EUVD: 🔒
Entry
Created: 09/26/2025 20:55Updated: 09/27/2025 10:40
Changes: 09/26/2025 20:55 (51), 09/27/2025 09:31 (12), 09/27/2025 10:40 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.