Anti SpamWordPress extension · Cleantalk
CVE-2023-51696
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 СleanTalk - Anti-Spam Protection Spam protection, Anti-Spam, FireWall by CleanTalk.This issue affects Spam protection, Anti-Spam, FireWall by CleanTalk: from n/a through 6.20.
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 CleanTalk Anti-Spam plugin allows attackers to trick authenticated administrators into performing unwanted actions (like modifying spam settings or whitelists) via maliciously crafted requests. The lack of proper anti-CSRF tokens on state-changing operations enables attackers to execute commands in the context of a logged-in administrator.
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
Anti SpamWordPress extension
< 6.21CVSS 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.
-
Identify installed version of CleanTalk Anti-SpamLocate the main plugin file (cleantalk.php or similar) in wp-content/plugins/ and read the 'Version' header from the plugin file comments, or query the WordPress database: SELECT option_value FROM wp_options WHERE option_name LIKE '%cleantalk%version%'Affected if The reported version is below 6.21
-
Verify WordPress nonces are present in admin settings formsInspect PHP files in the plugin for 'wp_nonce_field' or 'wp_create_nonce' calls within functions that handle spam settings, whitelist modifications, or other state-changing admin actions. Search the plugin directory for these nonce functions.Affected if No wp_nonce calls are found in files handling admin form submissions for settings or whitelists
-
Confirm AJAX endpoints verify noncesSearch plugin files for 'admin-ajax.php' registrations (add_action calls) and check if those handlers include nonce verification via 'check_admin_referer' or 'wp_verify_nonce' before processing requestsAffected if AJAX handlers for state-changing operations lack nonce verification calls
-
Inspect form output for nonce field renderingExamine the HTML source of the CleanTalk settings pages in WordPress admin (SPAM Firewall, Settings, White/Black lists) to verify that hidden nonce fields are present in forms that modify plugin stateAffected if Forms modifying settings or whitelists do not contain hidden nonce input fields (name typically starts with '_wpnonce')
If the installed CleanTalk Anti-Spam version is below 6.21 AND the plugin lacks proper nonce implementation in its admin forms and AJAX handlers, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2023-51696.
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.
dbcve · scoped6.21
Implement anti-CSRF tokens (nonces) on all forms and AJAX endpoints that perform state-changing operations, verify nonce validity before processing requests, and set SameSite attribute on session cookies.
6.21
- Backup your WordPress website before making any changes
- Navigate to Plugins > Installed Plugins in your WordPress admin dashboard
- Find the CleanTalk Anti-Spam plugin and click 'Update now' to upgrade to version 6.21 or later
- Alternatively, download version 6.21+ from the WordPress plugin repository and upload manually via Plugins > Add New > Upload Plugin
- Verify the plugin version shows 6.21 or higher after updating
- Test that the anti-spam functionality is working correctly by submitting a test form
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Anti Spam
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-51696 — 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-2023-51696 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