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

CVE-2025-30608

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-03-24
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 Anthony WordPress SQL Backup wordpress-sql-backup allows Stored XSS.This issue affects WordPress SQL Backup: from n/a through <= 3.5.2.

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

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the WordPress SQL Backup plugin enables attackers to craft malicious requests that result in Stored XSS. The plugin lacks proper CSRF token validation on form submissions that handle backup operations, allowing attackers to trick authenticated administrators into executing unintended actions that inject malicious scripts into stored backup configurations or metadata.

MitigationImplement WordPress nonces for all form submissions and AJAX actions, validate nonce tokens server-side, and apply proper input sanitization and output escaping when handling backup-related data to prevent XSS.

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. Verify WordPress SQL Backup plugin is installed
    Navigate to WordPress admin dashboard > Plugins and locate the SQL Backup plugin, or check the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for a backup-related plugin folder
    Affected if The SQL Backup plugin is active on the WordPress site
  2. Check plugin version against available releases
    In WordPress admin > Plugins > Installed Plugins, locate the SQL Backup plugin and note the version number. Compare this version to any official changelog or release notes for the plugin
    Affected if The installed version is any version prior to when CSRF protection was implemented
  3. Inspect backup operation forms for nonce fields
    View the page source of any page containing backup operation forms (create backup, restore, configure backup settings). Search for input fields with type='hidden' containing 'nonce' in the name or value, orwpnonce or _wpnonce parameters
    Affected if Forms handling backup operations lack nonce fields or the nonce field is present but not validated server-side
  4. Verify server-side nonce validation in plugin code
    Access plugin PHP files via file manager or FTP. Search for form handlers and AJAX endpoints that process backup operations. Look for wp_verify_nonce or check_admin_referer calls in the code handling these requests
    Affected if The backup operation handlers do not call wp_verify_nonce or check_admin_referer to validate CSRF tokens
  5. Check if backup configuration data is sanitized before storage
    Examine the plugin code that saves backup configurations or metadata. Look for functions like sanitize_text_field, esc_attr, or other sanitization functions when saving backup-related data to the database
    Affected if Backup configuration or metadata is stored without proper sanitization, allowing injected script tags

The site is affected if the WordPress SQL Backup plugin is installed and its backup operation forms lack server-side nonce validation combined with insufficient input sanitization for stored backup data.

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 WordPress nonces for all form submissions and AJAX actions, validate nonce tokens server-side, and apply proper input sanitization and output escaping when handling backup-related data to prevent XSS.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-30608 — 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-2025-30608 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