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

CVE-2025-28933

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-03-11
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 maxfoundry MaxA/B maxab allows Stored XSS.This issue affects MaxA/B: from n/a through <= 2.2.2.

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 MaxA/B plugin (versions up to 2.2.2) allows attackers to craft malicious requests that inject stored XSS payloads. The lack of anti-CSRF tokens on state-changing actions enables authenticated attackers to trick administrators into executing unintended code through the plugin's administrative interface.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens on all plugin forms andAJAX actions that modify data, and validate these tokens server-side. Update to the latest plugin version when available.

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. Identify MaxA/B plugin installation and version
    Locate the plugin directory (typically in wp-content/plugins/ or similar CMS plugin folder) and read the main plugin file header to find the declared version number. Compare against the affected range: versions 2.2.2 and below are vulnerable.
    Affected if The plugin is installed and the version number is 2.2.2 or lower.
  2. Verify plugin is active on the site
    Check the CMS admin interface plugin list or inspect the active plugins configuration in the database to confirm the MaxA/B plugin is enabled.
    Affected if The plugin is installed and currently active/enabled.
  3. Inspect plugin admin forms for anti-CSRF tokens
    Access the plugin administrative interface pages (A/B testing configuration, goal settings, variant editor) and view the HTML source of all forms that modify data. Look for hidden input fields containing tokens (such as 'nonce', 'csrf_token', or 'wpnonce') or check for headers like 'X-WP-Nonce'.
    Affected if Forms that change state (save settings, create/edit variants, modify goals) lack anti-CSRF token fields or token validation.
  4. Examine stored plugin data for injected scripts
    Query the database tables where the plugin stores configuration, test names, variant content, and goal definitions. Inspect the stored values for suspicious HTML script tags, event handlers (onload, onerror, onclick), or javascript: URIs.
    Affected if Any stored plugin data contains unsanitized HTML or JavaScript code that could execute in an administrator's browser.
  5. Check server access logs for CSRF attack patterns
    Review web server access logs for POST requests to plugin AJAX endpoints or form handlers originating from external referrers or unexpected origins, particularly with repetitive parameter patterns indicative of automated CSRF probing.
    Affected if Unusual POST requests to plugin endpoints are present from sources outside the site's admin domain.

If the MaxA/B plugin is installed, active, and version 2.2.2 or lower without anti-CSRF protection on state-changing forms, the environment is vulnerable to CVE-2025-28933.

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 on all plugin forms andAJAX actions that modify data, and validate these tokens server-side. Update to the latest plugin version when available.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
17.0 hours of engineering $3,000
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-28933 — 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-2025-28933 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