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

CVE-2025-31054

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-12-31
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 Themefy Bloggie allows Reflected XSS.This issue affects Bloggie: from n/a through 2.0.8.

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 Themefy Bloggie plugin versions up to 2.0.8 allows authenticated users to be tricked into executing malicious requests that result in reflected XSS attacks.

MitigationApply CSRF token validation to all state-changing operations and implement proper output encoding for user-supplied data to prevent XSS. Update to patched version if 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. Verify Bloggie plugin is installed
    Check for the Bloggie plugin directory in wp-content/plugins/ and review the main plugin file header for version information
    Affected if Plugin files exist and version is 2.0.8 or lower
  2. Confirm plugin is active
    Access WordPress admin panel and check if Bloggie plugin is enabled, or query the wp_options table for active_plugins
    Affected if Plugin is active in the WordPress installation
  3. Check for CSRF token implementation
    Review plugin PHP files for state-changing operations (settings saves, form submissions) and verify if they implement nonces/tokens for CSRF protection
    Affected if State-changing actions lack token validation (check for wp_nonce_field or check_admin_referer)
  4. Verify XSS output encoding
    Review plugin code for proper output escaping when handling user-supplied data (look for esc_html, esc_attr, or similar sanitization functions)
    Affected if User data is reflected without escaping functions

Environment is affected if Bloggie plugin versions up to 2.0.8 are installed and active, with state-changing operations lacking CSRF token validation and user input without proper output encoding.

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 token validation to all state-changing operations and implement proper output encoding for user-supplied data to prevent XSS. Update to patched version if available.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-31054 — 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-2025-31054 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