CVE-2025-13970
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 · uneditedOpenPLC_V3 is vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack due to the absence of proper CSRF validation. This issue allows an unauthenticated attacker to trick a logged-in administrator into visiting a maliciously crafted link, potentially enabling unauthorized modification of PLC settings or the upload of malicious programs which could lead to significant disruption or damage to connected systems.
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 confidenceOpenPLC_V3 lacks CSRF token validation on state-changing operations, allowing attackers to craft malicious requests that execute when an authenticated administrator visits a crafted link. This enables unauthorized modification of PLC settings or upload of malicious programs.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/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 OpenPLC versionCheck the installed OpenPLC version by reviewing the application startup logs, looking in the installed package metadata, or accessing the web interface version information if availableAffected if The installed version corresponds to OpenPLC_V3 (any version of the v3 branch)
-
Inspect HTML forms for CSRF tokensAccess the OpenPLC web interface and view the page source of forms that perform state-changing operations (e.g., program upload, PLC configuration, runtime control). Search for hidden input fields containing token values or similar anti-CSRF mechanismsAffected if No CSRF token or unique token-like parameter is present in the HTML forms for sensitive operations
-
Check for CSRF token validation in request handlersExamine the server-side code that handles state-changing requests (program uploads, configuration changes, runtime commands). Look for logic that validates anti-CSRF tokens before processing the requestAffected if The request handlers do not validate any CSRF token or anti-CSRF parameter before executing state-changing operations
-
Verify Origin or Referer header validationReview the server-side code for state-changing endpoints to determine if the Origin or Referer HTTP headers are validated against an allowlist before processing sensitive operationsAffected if Sensitive endpoints accept requests without validating the Origin or Referer header, allowing cross-origin requests to be processed
An environment is affected if it runs OpenPLC_V3 and the forms for sensitive operations lack CSRF token fields or the server does not validate CSRF tokens or origin headers before executing state-changing 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.
From vendor dataImplement the synchronizer token pattern by adding unique CSRF tokens to all forms and AJAX requests, and validate the Origin/Referer header server-side on sensitive operations.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,720.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-13970 — 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-2025-13970 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