WordPressCMS

CVE-2007-0539

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v2.0 Published 2007-01-29
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 2.0 or later.
See remediation →
87/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
The wp_remote_fopen function in WordPress before 2.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (bandwidth or thread consumption) via pingback service calls with a source URI that corresponds to a large file, which triggers a long download session without a timeout constraint.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · high confidence

The wp_remote_fopen function in WordPress before 2.1 lacks timeout constraints when making remote HTTP requests. Attackers can exploit this via pingback service calls using source URIs pointing to large files, triggering prolonged download sessions that consume excessive bandwidth and server threads, resulting in denial of service.

MitigationUpgrade to WordPress 2.1 or later which implements proper timeout handling for remote requests in the wp_remote_fopen function.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
WordPressCMS
Affected:<= 2.0

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Authentication
None
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
Complete

AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify WordPress version
    Check the wp-includes/version.php file or look for the $wp_version variable in your WordPress installation. You can also check the meta tag in the HTML source of your site.
    Affected if The installed version is 2.0 or earlier (2.0, 1.5.x, or older)
  2. Locate the wp_remote_fopen function
    Search for the function definition in your WordPress codebase, typically in wp-includes/functions.php or similar core files. Open the function and examine its implementation.
    Affected if The function exists and contains no timeout parameter or stream_set_timeout call when making remote requests
  3. Verify absence of timeout handling
    Examine the wp_remote_fopen function code for any timeout-related parameters such as stream_set_timeout, curl timeout options, or context timeout settings. Look for any limit on how long the remote request can take.
    Affected if No timeout mechanism is present in the function for HTTP requests
  4. Check if pingback is enabled
    In WordPress admin, go to Settings > Writing and check if XML-RPC/Pingback is enabled. Alternatively, check for xmlrpc.php endpoint availability and look for pingback.ping in the XML-RPC methods.
    Affected if Pingback functionality is enabled and accessible (xmlrpc.php is active)
  5. Test remote request behavior
    Use a tool to make a test pingback request to a large file URL and observe if the request hangs or takes an extended time without timeout. Monitor server threads during the request.
    Affected if Remote requests to large files complete without timing out or erroring after a reasonable period

You are affected if your WordPress installation is version 2.0 or earlier AND the wp_remote_fopen function lacks timeout handling AND pingback is enabled, allowing attackers to trigger prolonged downloads.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 2.0
Interim mitigation

Upgrade to WordPress 2.1 or later which implements proper timeout handling for remote requests in the wp_remote_fopen function.

Fix this in WordPress Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
8.0 hours of engineering $1,420
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-0539 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2007-0539 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data