CVE-2025-49237
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in POEditor POEditor poeditor allows Path Traversal.This issue affects POEditor: from n/a through <= 0.9.10.
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 confidencePOEditor versions up to 0.9.10 contain a CSRF vulnerability that can be leveraged to perform path traversal attacks, potentially allowing unauthorized file access on the server.
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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Locate POEditor installation and determine versionCheck your web application's version file, composer.json, or admin dashboard 'About' page for POEditor version number. Compare against affected range: versions 0.9.10 and below.Affected if Installed version is 0.9.10 or lower
-
Identify if file import/export features are enabledReview POEditor admin settings or configuration files for active file handlers (import/export functions, translation file processors). Look for endpoints handling .po, .xliff, .json, or other localization file uploads/downloads.Affected if File import/export or translation file processing features are enabled and accessible
-
Inspect session management for CSRF protectionExamine the application's source code or HTTP responses for anti-CSRF token implementation in state-changing operations (POST/PUT/DELETE requests). Check if forms and API calls include CSRF tokens.Affected if No anti-CSRF tokens are present in file operation requests
-
Check request handling for path traversal vulnerabilityAnalyze HTTP requests related to file operations (look for 'file', 'path', 'filename', 'upload' parameters). Test if the application resolves paths outside the intended upload directory by inspecting how file paths are processed server-side.Affected if File operation parameters accept unsanitized path input without canonicalization checks
-
Verify file access restrictionsReview server configuration and application logic to determine if uploaded/imported files are restricted to a safe directory. Check if the application allows reading files outside the designated content root.Affected if File operations lack directory containment checks or allow absolute path references
You are affected if POEditor version 0.9.10 or lower is installed and the application handles file import/export or translation file operations without CSRF protection and path validation.
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 anti-CSRF tokens for state-changing operations and apply strict input validation with path canonicalization to prevent path traversal.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49237 — 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-2025-49237 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