Wp Report PostWordPress extension · Alexraven
CVE-2023-45769
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 · uneditedUnauth. Reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Alex Raven WP Report Post plugin <= 2.1.2 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 confidenceA reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the Alex Raven WP Report Post WordPress plugin versions 2.1.2 and below. The vulnerability is unauthenticated, meaning it can be exploited without any user credentials. Reflected XSS occurs when user-supplied input is echoed back in the response without proper sanitization or encoding, allowing malicious scripts to be executed in the victim's browser.
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
Wp Report PostWordPress extension
<= 2.1.2CVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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.
-
Confirm plugin installationLocate the plugin directory 'wp-report-post' in your WordPress installation under wp-content/plugins/ or use WP-CLI: wp plugin list --search='wp-report-post'Affected if The plugin directory or listing is not found, meaning the plugin is not installed.
-
Check installed versionRead the main plugin file (wp-report-post.php) header for 'Version:' value, or run: wp plugin list --search='wp-report-post' --format=jsonAffected if The version is 2.1.2 or lower, placing it within the affected range.
-
Verify plugin is activeCheck plugin status via WP-CLI: wp plugin status wp-report-post, or look for the plugin in WordPress admin under Plugins > Installed PluginsAffected if The plugin shows as 'Active', making the vulnerable code path accessible to unauthenticated users.
-
Identify vulnerable endpointExamine the plugin code for reflected parameters - look for $_GET, $_POST, or $_REQUEST usage where user input is echoed without sanitization (check files like includes/*.php or main plugin file)Affected if The plugin accepts and echoes user-supplied input back in the response without proper sanitization functions like esc_html(), esc_attr(), or wp_kses().
If the plugin is installed, active, and version 2.1.2 or below, your environment is affected by this unauthenticated reflected XSS vulnerability.
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 WP Report Post plugin to a version newer than 2.1.2. If no patched version is available, consider disabling or removing the plugin until a fix is released. Implement input validation and output encoding as a defense-in-depth measure.
Fix this in Wp Report Post
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-45769 — 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-2023-45769 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