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

CVE-2025-27298

HIGH · 8.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-02-24
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
90/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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 cmstactics WP Video Posts wp-video-posts allows OS Command Injection.This issue affects WP Video Posts: from n/a through <= 3.5.1.

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 confidence

A CSRF vulnerability in the WP Video Posts WordPress plugin (versions up to 3.5.1) allows attackers to trick authenticated administrators into executing OS commands. The plugin lacks proper anti-CSRF tokens on sensitive admin actions, which combined with insufficient input validation enables remote command execution.

MitigationApply CSRF tokens (nonces) to all state-changing admin actions and sanitize/validate all user inputs to prevent command injection. Update to the latest patched version when available, and consider disabling the plugin temporarily if not actively used.

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
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify WP Video Posts plugin is installed
    Navigate to WordPress admin > Plugins > Installed Plugins and locate 'WP Video Posts' in the list, or check the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for the video-posts folder
    Affected if The plugin appears in the installed plugins list
  2. Check installed plugin version
    In WordPress admin > Plugins, find WP Video Posts and view the version number displayed below the plugin name, or inspect the main plugin file (e.g., video-posts.php) for the 'Version' header
    Affected if The version number is 3.5.1 or lower, or if no version is displayed (indicating an old/unupdated install)
  3. Confirm plugin is active
    In WordPress admin > Plugins, verify that WP Video Posts shows as 'Active' under the plugin status
    Affected if The plugin is currently activated on the WordPress site
  4. Inspect admin action handlers for CSRF protection
    Examine the main plugin PHP file for admin action handlers (functions handling $_POST or $_GET requests). Look for the absence of wp_verify_nonce or check_admin_referer calls before state-changing operations
    Affected if Sensitive admin actions (settings updates, video imports, or similar) lack nonce verification code
  5. Check for command execution functionality
    Review plugin code for functions that execute system commands (shell_exec, exec, passthru, system, or similar PHP functions) with unsanitized user input
    Affected if The plugin contains command execution functions that process input from admin requests without proper sanitization

The environment is affected if WP Video Posts plugin is installed, active, and running version 3.5.1 or lower, with admin actions lacking CSRF nonce verification and user input passed to system command functions.

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

Apply CSRF tokens (nonces) to all state-changing admin actions and sanitize/validate all user inputs to prevent command injection. Update to the latest patched version when available, and consider disabling the plugin temporarily if not actively used.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-27298 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-27298 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