CVE-2025-49923
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 Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Craig Hewitt Seriously Simple Podcasting seriously-simple-podcasting allows DOM-Based XSS.This issue affects Seriously Simple Podcasting: from n/a through <= 3.11.1.
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 confidenceDOM-based Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Seriously Simple Podcasting WordPress plugin allows attackers to inject malicious JavaScript through unsanitized user input that is directly inserted into the page's Document Object Model without proper output encoding.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 3.12.0CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm plugin installationNavigate to WordPress admin > Plugins and verify that 'Seriously Simple Podcasting' (by Castos) is installed and activeAffected if The plugin is present and active in the WordPress installation
-
Check installed versionIn WordPress admin > Plugins, find Seriously Simple Podcasting and note the version number displayed. Alternatively, check the plugin's main PHP file header or version constantAffected if The installed version is lower than 3.12.0
-
Identify plugin-generated input fieldsView the podcast feed settings, episode submission forms, or any front-end pages where the plugin renders input fields. Inspect page source to identify form fields with names or IDs containing 'podcast', 'episode', or 'castos'Affected if The plugin renders user-facing input fields that accept and display data without visible sanitization
-
Test for DOM reflectionUse browser developer tools (F12). In the Console, enter a test string like '<img src=x onerror=alert(1)>' into any plugin input fields. Check the Elements tab to see if the string appears unescaped in the DOMAffected if The input is reflected into the DOM as raw HTML/JavaScript without encoding
The environment is affected if the Seriously Simple Podcasting plugin is active at a version below 3.12.0 and exposes any user input fields that get rendered unsanitized into the page DOM.
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.
dbcve · scoped3.12.0
Update Seriously Simple Podcasting to the latest patched version when available; until then, disable the plugin or implement additional input validation on any user-facing fields.
Seriously Simple Podcasting 3.12.0
- Update the Seriously Simple Podcasting plugin to version 3.12.0 or later to resolve the XSS vulnerability
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-49923 — 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-2025-49923 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