dbcve.org
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2025-23618

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-01-16
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
78/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in starise Twitter Shortcode twitter-shortcode allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Twitter Shortcode: from n/a through <= 0.9.

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 confidence

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the Twitter Shortcode WordPress plugin (version <= 0.9) allows attackers to craft malicious requests that inject persistent XSS payloads into the plugin's settings or displayed content due to missing anti-CSRF token validation on state-changing operations.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens (nonces) on all form submissions and AJAX endpoints in the plugin, and ensure all user-supplied data is properly sanitized before storage and escaped before output rendering.

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
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L

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. Check the installed version of the Twitter Shortcode plugin
    Navigate to WordPress Admin > Plugins > Installed Plugins and locate 'Twitter Shortcode', or inspect the plugin's main PHP file header for the 'Version' field, or run: wp plugin list | grep twitter-shortcode
    Affected if The version displayed is 0.9 or lower (e.g., 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, etc.)
  2. Inspect plugin PHP files for nonce validation on form submissions
    Access the plugin directory via FTP or file manager (wp-content/plugins/twitter-shortcode/) and open the main PHP files. Search for 'wp_nonce_field', 'wp_nonce_url', 'check_admin_referer', or 'check_ajax_referer' near any form tags, admin_menu callbacks, or AJAX handlers that modify plugin settings
    Affected if No nonce validation functions are found in files that handle state-changing operations (saving settings, updating options, etc.)
  3. Check for CSRF protection on AJAX endpoints
    Search the plugin files for 'add_action' calls registering AJAX handlers (e.g., 'wp_ajax_'). Inspect whether these handlers verify a nonce before processing requests
    Affected if AJAX endpoints exist but do not validate a nonce token before executing state-changing code
  4. Inspect data storage routines for input sanitization
    Search the plugin source code for functions that save user input to the database (update_option, update_post_meta, etc.). Verify that sanitization functions like sanitize_text_field, esc_attr, or sanitize_html_class are used on input before storage
    Affected if User-supplied data is stored without sanitization (e.g., raw input saved via update_option without sanitization functions)
  5. Inspect output rendering for proper escaping
    Search the plugin files for 'echo' or 'print' statements that output stored data. Verify that output uses escaping functions like esc_html, esc_attr, or esc_url before rendering
    Affected if Stored plugin data is echoed to the page without escaping functions, allowing stored XSS payloads to execute when the content is displayed

You are affected if the Twitter Shortcode plugin version is 0.9 or lower AND the plugin lacks anti-CSRF nonce validation on its form/AJAX handlers, allowing attackers to inject persistent XSS via CSRF attacks.

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

Implement anti-CSRF tokens (nonces) on all form submissions and AJAX endpoints in the plugin, and ensure all user-supplied data is properly sanitized before storage and escaped before output rendering.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-23618 — 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-2025-23618 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