CVE-2025-32304
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 · uneditedImproper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program ('PHP Remote File Inclusion') vulnerability in Mojoomla WPCHURCH allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects WPCHURCH: from n/a through 2.7.0.
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 WPCHURCH WordPress plugin up to version 2.7.0 contains a PHP Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability due to improper control of filenames in include/require statements. Attackers can manipulate input parameters to include arbitrary PHP files from the server's filesystem, potentially leading to code execution.
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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm WPCHURCH plugin is installedCheck if the wp-content/plugins/wpchurch directory exists on the server file systemAffected if The plugin directory exists in the WordPress plugins folder
-
Identify installed plugin versionRead the main plugin PHP file (wpchurch.php) and locate the 'Version:' header in the plugin comment blockAffected if The reported version is 2.7.0 or lower
-
Locate include/require statements using dynamic inputSearch the plugin source code for include, require, include_once, or require_once statements that use variables or request parameters without proper sanitization (e.g., include($_GET['...'], include($var) )Affected if Dynamic include/require statements using external input are found in the plugin code
-
Identify vulnerable parameter inputsExamine the identified include/require statements to determine which GET/POST parameters control the file path being includedAffected if URL parameters can be manipulated to control which file gets included
-
Verify directory traversal is possibleTest whether the vulnerable parameter accepts path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../) to access files outside the intended directoryAffected if The parameter allows reading files from arbitrary server paths
-
Confirm PHP file inclusion executionAttempt to include a known PHP file from the server (e.g., wp-config.php) using the vulnerable parameter to verify the LFI worksAffected if The server executes or displays content from files specified via the vulnerable parameter
You are affected if the WPCHURCH plugin versions 2.7.0 or lower are installed and the plugin contains include/require statements that use unsanitized user input to load arbitrary PHP files.
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 strict input validation and whitelist-based filtering on any parameters used in include/require statements. Use basename() to strip directory traversal sequences and validate that the resulting path matches expected patterns.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-32304 — 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-2025-32304 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