CVE-2025-12401
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 Label Plugins plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 0.5. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the label_plugins_options() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update settings and inject malicious web scripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
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 Label Plugins WordPress plugin lacks proper nonce validation on the label_plugins_options() function, allowing unauthenticated attackers to forge administrative requests and update plugin settings. This can lead to injection of malicious web scripts via the settings interface.
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
- 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.
-
Verify Label Plugins plugin is installedAccess WordPress admin dashboard, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins, and search for 'Label Plugins' or check the wp-content/plugins directory for a label-plugins folderAffected if The Label Plugins plugin appears in the installed plugins list
-
Check installed plugin versionIn WordPress admin, click on the Label Plugins plugin to view its details, or inspect the main plugin file (usually label-plugins.php) to find the version declaration in the plugin header commentAffected if The displayed version number is below 0.6 (e.g., 0.5, 0.4, etc.)
-
Confirm plugin settings functionality existsTry accessing the plugin settings page in WordPress admin (usually under Settings > Label Plugins or a dedicated Label Plugins menu item)Affected if The settings page loads and contains form fields for updating plugin options, indicating the vulnerable label_plugins_options() function is present
-
Check for nonce validation in plugin codeIf you have file access, examine the plugin PHP files for the label_plugins_options() function and verify if it includes nonce validation checks using wp_verify_nonce() or check_admin_referer()Affected if The function lacks proper nonce validation (no verification found in the function handling the settings update)
If the Label Plugins WordPress plugin is installed with a version lower than 0.6, the site is affected by this unauthenticated CSRF vulnerability allowing settings injection.
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 Label Plugins plugin to version 0.6 or later. Until a patch is available, consider disabling the plugin or implementing additional server-side CSRF protections.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-12401 — 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-2025-12401 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