CVE-2025-10212
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 SiteAlert (Formerly WP Health) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized access of data due to a missing capability check on multiple functions in all versions up to, and including, 1.9.8. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to view the site health information, including a list of installed and outdated plugins, PHP and Database version, etc.
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 SiteAlert WordPress plugin lacks proper capability checks on functions that expose site health data. This allows any unauthenticated visitor to retrieve sensitive system information including installed plugin lists, PHP version, database version, and other diagnostic data that should only be accessible to authorized administrators.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/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.
-
Verify SiteAlert plugin is installedIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and look for SiteAlert, or check the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for the sitealert folderAffected if SiteAlert plugin is installed and active
-
Check installed versionIn WordPress admin > Plugins, find SiteAlert and note the version number displayed, or read the main plugin file (e.g., sitealert.php) and look for the Version headerAffected if Version is below 1.9.9 (the version that added proper capability checks)
-
Test unauthenticated access to health data endpointSend a direct HTTP request to the SiteAlert ajax or endpoint that exposes site health data (commonly /wp-admin/admin-ajax.php?action=get_site_health or similar), without providing any authentication cookies or credentialsAffected if The endpoint returns sensitive information (plugin list, PHP version, database version) without requiring login
-
Inspect plugin code for capability checksExamine the SiteAlert PHP files (particularly ajax handlers or any file handling site_health data) and look for current_user_can() or capability checks on the functions that expose health dataAffected if No capability checks or inadequate checks (e.g., only checking is_user_logged_in() instead of specific admin capabilities) are found
A user is affected if SiteAlert plugin is installed with a version below 1.9.9 and the site health data endpoint responds to unauthenticated requests
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 · scopedUpdate the SiteAlert plugin to version 1.9.9 or later which implements proper authorization checks on the affected functions.
1.9.9 or later
- Update the SiteAlert (formerly WP Health) plugin to the latest available version from the WordPress plugin repository
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-10212 — 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-2025-10212 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