CVE-2025-53216
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 themeuniver Glamer glamer allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects Glamer: from n/a through <= 1.0.2.
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 confidenceA PHP Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability in the Glamer theme (version <= 1.0.2) allows attackers to control filenames used in PHP include/require statements. This improper input validation enables remote file inclusion attacks where malicious PHP files can be executed or sensitive system files can be read.
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.
-
Identify Glamer theme versionLocate the theme's style.css file (typically in /wp-content/themes/glamer/) and read the 'Version:' header in the file comment, or check the theme's main PHP file for a version constant definitionAffected if The installed version is 1.0.2 or lower
-
Examine theme PHP files for include/require usageSearch all PHP files in the /wp-content/themes/glamer/ directory for include, include_once, require, or require_once statements. Review each to see if the included file path comes from a user-supplied parameter ($_GET, $_POST, $_REQUEST)Affected if Any include/require statement uses a variable derived from user input without validation
-
Inspect file loading functionsExamine theme PHP files for functions that load files (such as get_template_part, load_template, or custom file inclusion functions). Trace whether the parameters passed to these functions are validated before useAffected if File loading functions accept unvalidated user-controlled path arguments
-
Check for basename/realpath validationSearch the theme's PHP files for the presence of basename() or realpath() functions used to sanitize file paths before inclusion. Verify if these sanitization functions are actually applied to the include/require path variablesAffected if User-controlled file paths are used in include/require without passing through basename() or realpath() sanitization first
-
Test for LFI via HTTP parameter injectionIf the theme accepts file path parameters via HTTP GET or POST requests, attempt to include a known safe file (such as ../../../../../../etc/passwd or ../wp-config.php) to confirm the vulnerability is exploitableAffected if The application returns contents of files outside the theme directory based on crafted parameter values
A system is affected if the Glamer theme version is 1.0.2 or lower AND PHP include/require statements in the theme use user-supplied input without proper validation through basename(), realpath(), or allowlist checks.
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 using allowlists for permitted files, sanitize user-supplied path inputs with basename() and realpath(), and avoid using user input directly in include/require statements.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $3,168.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-53216 — 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-2025-53216 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