CVE-2010-1610
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 index.php in OpenCart 1.4 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of an application administrator for requests that create an administrative account via a POST request with the route parameter set to "user/user/insert." NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.
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 OpenCart 1.4's index.php allows remote attackers to trick an authenticated administrator into unknowingly creating a new administrative account via a crafted POST request with the route parameter set to 'user/user/insert'. The application lacks proper CSRF token validation, enabling attackers to hijack the administrator's session.
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= 1.4CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/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.
-
Identify OpenCart versionLocate the OpenCart version number in the admin panel footer or in a version file (such as index.php or a version.php file in the root directory). Compare the installed version to the affected range: OpenCart 1.4.xAffected if The installed version is OpenCart 1.4.x (any minor release)
-
Verify admin access existsConfirm the OpenCart admin panel is accessible (typically at /admin/ or /administration/) and requires authenticationAffected if The admin panel exists and authenticates users
-
Inspect user creation form for CSRF protectionLog in as an administrator, navigate to the user creation page (or the page corresponding to route=user/user/insert), and examine the HTML source code to determine if a CSRF token or anti-CSRF token field is present in the formAffected if The user creation form does not contain any CSRF token or anti-CSRF token field (such as a hidden input with a random value or a token parameter)
-
Check server-side token validationExamine the server-side code that handles the user/user/insert route to determine if CSRF token validation is performed before processing the POST requestAffected if The server-side code does not validate a CSRF token before creating a new administrative account
A user is affected if they are running OpenCart 1.4.x and the user creation form lacks CSRF token protection both in the HTML (client-side) and in the corresponding server-side processing code.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) in all state-changing forms including the user creation form, and validate these tokens server-side before processing POST requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-1610 — 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-2010-1610 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