dbcve.org
Path TraversalWeakness · CWE-22

CVE-2025-13725

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-01-17
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
71/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The Gutenberg Thim Blocks – Page Builder, Gutenberg Blocks for the Block Editor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file reads in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.1. This is due to insufficient path validation in the server-side rendering of the thim-blocks/icon block. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to read the contents of arbitrary files on the server via the 'iconSVG' parameter, which can contain sensitive information such as wp-config.php.

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 confidence

The Gutenberg Thim Blocks plugin for WordPress contains a path traversal vulnerability in the server-side rendering of its icon block. The 'iconSVG' parameter lacks sufficient validation, allowing authenticated users with Contributor-level access or higher to read arbitrary files on the server by manipulating the path (e.g., ../../wp-config.php).

MitigationUpdate the plugin to a patched version if available; otherwise, implement strict path validation and sanitization on the iconSVG parameter to prevent directory traversal attacks.

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
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm Gutenberg Thim Blocks plugin is installed
    Go to WordPress Admin > Plugins and look for 'Gutenberg Thim Blocks' or check the plugins directory via FTP/CLI for the thim-blocks folder
    Affected if Plugin is present in the installation
  2. Identify installed plugin version
    In WordPress Admin > Plugins, click on the plugin to view version details, or read the main plugin PHP file header for the 'Version' tag
    Affected if Version is unknown, unpatched, or falls within any vulnerable version range
  3. Verify icon block functionality exists
    Check if the plugin includes an icon block by inspecting the blocks directory for icon-related files (e.g., icon/index.js, icon/block.json) or by attempting to add an icon block in the WordPress block editor
    Affected if Icon block component is present and can be accessed
  4. Confirm user role access to icon block
    Check if any user role (Contributor, Author, Editor, Administrator) exists with access to create/edit posts where the icon block could be used; review role capabilities in WordPress under Users > Users or via a role management plugin
    Affected if At least one user with Contributor-level or higher access exists on the site
  5. Test for path traversal vulnerability (optional/safe check)
    Only if authorized and in a non-production environment: use a tool like Burp Suite or curl to intercept a request to the icon block rendering endpoint and attempt a benign path traversal (e.g., ?iconSVG=../../readme.txt) to see if arbitrary file read is possible without authentication bypass
    Affected if The iconSVG parameter accepts path traversal sequences and returns file contents

A user is affected if the Gutenberg Thim Blocks plugin is installed, contains an icon block with iconSVG parameter, and any Contributor-level or higher user account exists on the WordPress site.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Update the plugin to a patched version if available; otherwise, implement strict path validation and sanitization on the iconSVG parameter to prevent directory traversal attacks.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-13725 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-13725 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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