CVE-2025-22510
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 · uneditedDeserialization of Untrusted Data vulnerability in kkarpieszuk WC Price History for Omnibus wc-price-history allows Object Injection.This issue affects WC Price History for Omnibus: from n/a through <= 2.1.4.
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 confidenceA deserialization of untrusted data vulnerability in the WC Price History for Omnibus WordPress plugin (versions up to 2.1.4) allows attackers to inject malicious PHP objects via unsafe deserialization, potentially leading to remote code execution through PHP object injection 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/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.
-
Identify if WC Price History for Omnibus plugin is installedCheck the WordPress plugins directory (wp-content/plugins/) for a folder named 'wc-price-history-for-omnibus' or similar variant of the plugin name.Affected if The plugin folder exists in the WordPress plugins directory.
-
Determine the installed plugin versionOpen the main plugin PHP file (usually in the plugin folder root) and look for the version comment in the file header, or check the readme.txt file for the 'Stable tag' version number.Affected if The reported version is 2.1.4 or any earlier version.
-
Verify the plugin is activeLog into the WordPress admin dashboard and navigate to Plugins > Installed Plugins, or query the wp_options table for the option_name 'active_plugins' to confirm the plugin is enabled.Affected if The plugin appears in the list of active plugins.
-
Search for unsafe unserialize() calls in plugin filesUsing a file search tool or grep, scan all PHP files within the plugin folder for the pattern 'unserialize(' without evidence of sanitization, validation, or use of allowed_classes parameter.Affected if PHP files contain unserialize() calls that process input without strict validation or allowed_classes restriction.
-
Identify if the plugin handles external inputReview plugin files that process $_GET, $_POST, $_REQUEST, or $_COOKIE variables, particularly those involved in AJAX endpoints or frontend submissions, to see if serialized data is being received and processed.Affected if The plugin accepts and deserializes data from user-supplied sources without validation.
You are affected if WC Price History for Omnibus plugin is installed, active, at version 2.1.4 or below, and contains unsafe unserialize() calls that process untrusted input.
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 to a patched version of WC Price History for Omnibus if available; otherwise disable the plugin until a fix is released. If the vulnerable code can be identified, replace unsafe unserialize() calls with json_decode() or other safe alternatives and implement strict input validation.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-22510 — 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-2025-22510 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