Front End UsersWordPress extension · Etoilewebdesign
CVE-2023-34005
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 Etoile Web Design Front End Users plugin <= 3.2.24 versions.
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 · moderate confidenceCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the Etoile Web Design Front End Users WordPress plugin versions 3.2.24 and below. The plugin lacks proper anti-CSRF token validation on sensitive actions, allowing attackers to trick authenticated users into unknowingly executing unwanted operations such as modifying user data or performing administrative actions.
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
Front End UsersWordPress extension
<= 3.2.24CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 the Front End Users plugin is installedLog in to WordPress admin and navigate to Plugins > Installed Plugins. Locate 'Etoilewebdesign Front End Users' in the list. Confirm it appears in your installed plugins.Affected if The plugin is not installed on the WordPress site.
-
Check the installed plugin versionIn the Plugins list view, look at the version number displayed beneath the plugin name 'Etoilewebdesign Front End Users'. Alternatively, open the main plugin file (usually front-end-users.php) and locate the 'Version' header in the file comment block.Affected if The displayed version number is 3.2.24 or lower (for example: 3.2.24, 3.2.23, 3.2.20, etc.).
-
Inspect plugin PHP files for nonce validationNavigate to the plugin directory (wp-content/plugins/front-end-users). Search PHP files for 'wp_nonce' or 'verify_nonce' function calls. Specifically examine form handlers and AJAX action callback functions that process user data modifications or administrative actions.Affected if No wp_nonce_field, wp_nonce_url, or check_admin_referer calls are found in files handling sensitive operations (user creation, user data changes, role modifications).
-
Test form submissions for CSRF token requirementSubmit a Front End Users form (such as user registration, profile update, or user management form) using a browser proxy. Remove any token parameters (like _wpnonce) from the request and resend it. Observe whether the action still executes.Affected if The form submission succeeds without a valid nonce token, indicating the server does not validate CSRF protections.
-
Review AJAX endpoint behaviorIdentify AJAX actions registered by the plugin (look for add_action calls with 'wp_ajax_' or 'wp_ajax_nopriv_' hooks). Attempt to call these endpoints directly without including a valid nonce parameter.Affected if The AJAX requests execute successfully and perform state-changing operations (data modification, user management) without validating a nonce token server-side.
Your environment is affected if the Front End Users plugin is installed with version 3.2.24 or lower and the plugin's forms or AJAX endpoints process sensitive actions without validating anti-CSRF tokens.
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 dataUpdate the Front End Users plugin to a version newer than 3.2.24 if available; otherwise, implement nonces (anti-CSRF tokens) on all state-changing forms and AJAX actions within the plugin and validate these tokens server-side before processing requests.
Fix this in Front End Users
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-34005 — 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-2023-34005 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