CVE-2025-23808
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Dutch van Andel Custom List Table Example custom-list-table-example allows Reflected XSS.This issue affects Custom List Table Example: from n/a through <= 1.4.1.
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 confidenceCSRF vulnerability in the Custom List Table Example plugin <=1.4.1 allows attackers to trick authenticated users into executing unintended actions via maliciously crafted requests, which enables reflected XSS injection due to insufficient input validation.
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate the plugin filesBrowse to the WordPress plugins directory (wp-content/plugins/) and search for a folder named 'custom-list-table-example' or similar variant containing 'custom-list-table'Affected if The plugin folder exists in the plugins directory
-
Identify the installed versionOpen the main plugin PHP file (usually named similarly to the plugin folder) and locate the 'Version' header in the plugin comment block, or check the readme.txt file for the version numberAffected if The version number found is 1.4.1 or lower (e.g., 1.4.0, 1.3.0, 1.0, etc.)
-
Confirm authentication requirementVerify that the WordPress site has users with administrative or editor-level access who can be logged in while triggering the crafted requestAffected if Authenticated users with elevated privileges exist on the site and can be targeted via social engineering
-
Check for input handlingInspect plugin source code for form submissions or URL parameters that accept user input without nonce verification and without sanitization (such as missing esc_html(), esc_attr(), or sanitize_text_field())Affected if Plugin code processes user input from GET/POST parameters without anti-CSRF tokens and without proper output encoding
The environment is affected if the Custom List Table Example plugin is installed with version 1.4.1 or lower and handles user input without CSRF protection and XSS sanitization.
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 the latest plugin version and implement anti-CSRF tokens (nonce validation) alongside proper input sanitization and output encoding to prevent XSS.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,848.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-23808 — 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-2025-23808 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