CVE-2025-28894
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 frucomerci List of Posts from each Category plugin for WordPress list-posts-by-category allows Stored XSS.This issue affects List of Posts from each Category plugin for WordPress: from n/a through <= 2.0.
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 · high confidenceThe frucomerci List of Posts from each Category WordPress plugin (versions <= 2.0) contains a CSRF vulnerability that allows attackers to inject malicious JavaScript via crafted requests, resulting in Stored XSS. The lack of proper anti-CSRF token validation on admin actions enables authenticated administrators to be tricked into executing unintended commands that persist malicious scripts.
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.
-
Verify plugin installationCheck for the frucomerci plugin directory in wp-content/plugins (typically named 'frucomerci-posts-list' or similar) and confirm plugin files exist on the serverAffected if The plugin directory is present on the server
-
Check installed versionRead the main plugin PHP file header for the 'Version' field, or query WordPress database wp_options table for the option_name containing 'frucomerci' and 'version'Affected if The reported version number is 2.0 or lower
-
Confirm admin access is enabledVerify the WordPress site has an active admin dashboard accessible at /wp-admin and that the frucomerci plugin is activated in Plugins > Installed PluginsAffected if The plugin is activated and admin panel is accessible to authenticated administrators
-
Assess XSS exposureReview plugin source code for admin action handlers (POST/GET requests) that process user input without nonce validation checks (look for 'wp_verify_nonce' or 'check_admin_referer' calls) and without output sanitization (absence of esc_html, esc_attr, sanitize_text_field)Affected if Admin action functions lack nonce validation and input/output sanitization on user-supplied data
The environment is affected if the frucomerci List of Posts from each Category plugin is installed with version 2.0 or lower, is activated, and has admin-facing functions that process user input without CSRF token verification.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF tokens (nonces) on all state-changing admin actions and forms, and validate/sanitize all user inputs and outputs to prevent XSS execution.
- 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-2025-28894 — 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-2025-28894 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