CVE-2025-22311
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 · uneditedImproper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') vulnerability in DeluxeThemes Private Messages for UserPro userpro-messaging.This issue affects Private Messages for UserPro: from n/a through <= 4.10.0.
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 · moderate confidenceThis is a Remote File Inclusion (RFI) vulnerability in the DeluxeThemes Private Messages for UserPro WordPress plugin (versions <= 4.10.0). The vulnerability allows unauthenticated attackers to include remote files via improper validation of input parameters used in PHP include/require statements, potentially leading to arbitrary 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Verify the Private Messages for UserPro plugin is installedCheck the WordPress plugins directory or access the Plugins page in the WordPress admin dashboard to confirm DeluxeThemes Private Messages for UserPro is presentAffected if The plugin appears in the list of installed plugins
-
Determine the installed plugin versionView the plugin details in WordPress admin (Plugins > Plugin Editor or the plugin card) or check the main plugin file header for the Version: X.X.X declarationAffected if The version listed is 4.10.0 or lower
-
Identify the active plugin files handling include or require statementsLocate the plugin files in wp-content/plugins/private-messages-for-userpro/ and search for PHP include, include_once, require, or require_once statements that use variables without sanitizationAffected if Files contain include/require statements using raw user-supplied input (e.g., include($_GET['param']); or require($file);) without proper validation
-
Confirm the plugin is currently activeCheck the WordPress admin Plugins page to see if the plugin status shows as ActiveAffected if The plugin shows as Active and running on the site
-
Test for unauthenticated parameter injection (if safe to do)Review the identified include/require code paths to determine which GET/POST parameters feed into these statements and whether external URLs can be passedAffected if The plugin accepts parameters that can be used to include remote URLs without validation
A site is affected if it has DeluxeThemes Private Messages for UserPro plugin installed, active, and running version 4.10.0 or lower with vulnerable file inclusion logic present.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of Private Messages for UserPro that properly validates and sanitizes file inclusion paths. If no patch is available, disable the plugin until a fix is released.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-22311 — 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-2025-22311 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