CVE-2008-4734
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 · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the wpcr_do_options_page function in WP Comment Remix plugin before 1.4.4 for WordPress allows remote attackers to perform unauthorized actions as administrators via a request that sets the wpcr_hidden_form_input parameter.
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 confidenceCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the wpcr_do_options_page function of WP Comment Remix plugin for WordPress allows remote attackers to perform unauthorized administrative actions by tricking authenticated administrators into submitting crafted requests that set the wpcr_hidden_form_input parameter, likely bypassing form validation.
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<= 1.4.3= 1.4CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify WP Comment Remix plugin is installedCheck for the presence of the wp-comment-remix directory in wp-content/plugins/ or view installed plugins in WordPress admin panel under Plugins > Installed PluginsAffected if Plugin directory exists or plugin appears in WordPress admin plugin list
-
Check installed plugin versionOpen the main plugin file (typically wp-content/plugins/wp-comment-remix/wpcr.php or similar) and look for the Version header in the plugin comment block at the top of the fileAffected if Version is 1.4 or any version <= 1.4.3 as listed in the plugin header
-
Locate the vulnerable functionSearch the plugin source code for the function named wpcr_do_options_page - this is typically found in the main plugin PHP fileAffected if Function wpcr_do_options_page exists in the plugin code
-
Check for CSRF protection in the options functionExamine the wpcr_do_options_page function code and look for nonce validation calls (such as wp_verify_nonce, check_admin_referer, or defined NONCE_KEY constants) before processing the wpcr_hidden_form_input parameterAffected if No nonce verification is performed before processing the wpcr_hidden_form_input parameter, or nonce checks are missing entirely in this function
User is affected if WP Comment Remix plugin version 1.4 or <=1.4.3 is installed and active, and the wpcr_do_options_page function lacks anti-CSRF nonce validation for the wpcr_hidden_form_input parameter.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 dataUpgrade to WP Comment Remix plugin version 1.4.4 or later which includes CSRF protection. Implement anti-CSRF nonce validation in the wpcr_do_options_page function to verify request authenticity.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-4734 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-4734 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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