CVE-2024-3809
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 Porto Theme - Functionality plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Local File Inclusion in all versions up to, and including, 3.0.9 via the 'slideshow_type' post meta. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level and above permissions, to include and execute arbitrary files on the server, allowing the execution of any PHP code in those files. This can be used to bypass access controls, obtain sensitive data, or achieve code execution in cases where php file type can be uploaded and included.
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 confidenceThe Porto Theme WordPress plugin is vulnerable to Local File Inclusion via the 'slideshow_type' post meta field. Authenticated attackers with contributor-level or higher permissions can manipulate this parameter to include and execute arbitrary PHP files on the server, leading to remote code execution.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
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 Porto Theme installationNavigate to Appearance > Themes in WordPress admin and locate the Porto theme. Check the theme version displayed or inspect the style.css file in the theme directory for the 'Version' header.Affected if Porto Theme is active and running
-
Confirm vulnerable version rangeCompare the installed Porto Theme version against the fixed version 3.0.10. Versions prior to 3.0.10 contain the vulnerability.Affected if Installed version is lower than 3.0.10
-
Detect usage of slideshow_type meta fieldQuery the WordPress database for posts containing the 'slideshow_type' meta key: SELECT post_id, meta_key, meta_value FROM wp_postmeta WHERE meta_key = 'slideshow_type'; (adjust prefix if wp_ is different).Affected if Any posts exist with slideshow_type meta value and the version is below 3.0.10
-
Audit contributor-level user accountsNavigate to Users > All Users in WordPress admin and identify accounts with Contributor, Author, Editor, or Administrator roles. These roles can exploit the LFI flaw.Affected if Any user accounts with contributor-level or higher permissions exist and version is vulnerable
User is affected if Porto Theme version is below 3.0.10 and any contributor-level or higher user accounts exist on the WordPress site.
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 to version 3.0.10 or later. Until patched, restrict contributor-level user permissions and audit existing user accounts.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-3809 — 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-2024-3809 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