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

CVE-2025-48362

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-08-28
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
61/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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 Saeed Sattar Beglou Hesabfa Accounting hesabfa-accounting allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects Hesabfa Accounting: from n/a through <= 2.2.5.

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 Hesabfa Accounting allows attackers to trick authenticated users into executing unintended actions by forcing their browser to send malicious requests, potentially leading to unauthorized data modifications or operations within the application.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations, validate Origin/Referer headers on POST requests, and configure SameSite attributes on session cookies to prevent cross-origin request forgery.

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
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/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 state-changing operations
    Review the application's forms and AJAX requests that perform actions like create, update, delete, or modify data. Common endpoints include those handling invoices, contacts, inventory, or financial transactions.
    Affected if The application lacks anti-CSRF tokens on these operations
  2. Inspect form submissions for CSRF tokens
    Examine HTML source code of forms submitting to state-changing endpoints. Look for hidden input fields containing randomized token values (often named _token, csrf_token, or similar) in POST/PUT/DELETE requests.
    Affected if No anti-CSRF token field is present in forms performing sensitive operations
  3. Verify Origin or Referer header validation
    Capture a POST request to a sensitive endpoint using a proxy (Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP, or browser DevTools) and replay it with an altered Origin header (e.g., Origin: http://malicious-site.com) or removed Referer header to see if the server accepts it.
    Affected if The server accepts requests from unexpected origins without validation
  4. Check session cookie SameSite attribute
    Inspect session cookies in browser DevTools (Application tab > Cookies) or via Set-Cookie headers in HTTP responses. Verify if the session cookie includes the SameSite attribute set to Strict or Lax.
    Affected if SameSite attribute is missing or set to None without Secure flag
  5. Test for CSRF vulnerability with proof-of-concept
    Create a minimal HTML page that automatically submits a form to a sensitive endpoint while the user is authenticated, hosted on a different origin. If the action executes successfully, the vulnerability exists.
    Affected if The malicious request executes successfully and modifies data

The environment is affected if state-changing operations lack anti-CSRF tokens, Origin/Referer validation is absent, and session cookies lack SameSite attributes, allowing forged requests from other origins to succeed.

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 (synchronizer token pattern) on all state-changing operations, validate Origin/Referer headers on POST requests, and configure SameSite attributes on session cookies to prevent cross-origin request forgery.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation16.0 h
  • Testing8.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
32.0 hours of engineering $5,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-48362 — 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-2025-48362 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