Wpforo ForumWordPress extension · Gvectors
CVE-2023-2249
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 · uneditedThe wpForo Forum plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Local File Include, Server-Side Request Forgery, and PHAR Deserialization in versions up to, and including, 2.1.7. This is due to the insecure use of file_get_contents without appropriate verification of the data being supplied to the function. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with minimal permissions such as a subscriber, to retrieve the contents of files like wp-config.php hosted on the system, perform a deserialization attack and possibly achieve remote code execution, and make requests to internal services.
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 analysisA PHP include or require path is built from user-controlled input, so an attacker can steer it to a remote URL or an unintended local file — and because the target is then executed as code, this often becomes remote code execution. It is the classic remote/local file-inclusion trap. The fix is never to build include paths from input: map requests to a fixed allow-list of includable files.
General guidance for the php file inclusion (rfi/lfi) class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
Wpforo ForumWordPress extension
<= 2.1.7CVSS 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
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
dbcve · scopedwpForo Forum plugin version 2.1.8 or later
- Upgrade the wpForo Forum plugin to version 2.1.8 or later to resolve the Local File Inclusion, SSRF, and PHAR Deserialization vulnerabilities.
- After upgrading, verify that the file inclusion vulnerability is patched by confirming that the Actions.php file no longer uses insecure file_get_contents without proper validation.
- Ensure that only trusted users (with permissions above subscriber) have access to sensitive functionality until the patch is applied.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-2249 — 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-2023-2249 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