CVE-2025-53565
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 RadiusTheme Widget for Google Reviews business-reviews-wp allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects Widget for Google Reviews: from n/a through <= 1.0.15.
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 confidenceA PHP Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability exists in the RadiusTheme Widget for Google Reviews WordPress plugin (business-reviews-wp). The plugin improperly validates file path parameters before using them in PHP include/require statements, allowing attackers to manipulate file paths and potentially read sensitive server files or execute malicious PHP code.
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.
-
Verify business-reviews-wp plugin is installedCheck WordPress Plugins admin page or inspect the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for a folder named business-reviews-wpAffected if Plugin directory exists in the WordPress plugins folder
-
Determine the installed plugin versionOpen the main plugin file (typically business-reviews-wp.php) and locate the Version header in the plugin comments, or view the version displayed in WordPress Admin > PluginsAffected if Installed version is 1.0.15 or lower
-
Locate file inclusion functions in plugin codeSearch plugin PHP files for include, require, include_once, or require_once statements that accept variables without validation (e.g., include($file); require($_GET['path']);)Affected if Code contains dynamic file inclusion using unsanitized input from $_GET, $_POST, or $_REQUEST
-
Identify the vulnerable parameter endpointExamine the plugin code to find which HTTP parameter controls the file path in the inclusion function, then check if that endpoint is accessible without authenticationAffected if A file path parameter in an include/require is reachable from the web and accepts user-supplied values
A WordPress site with business-reviews-wp version 1.0.15 or lower that uses dynamic file inclusion with unvalidated user input is affected by this LFI vulnerability
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 dataUpgrade the plugin to a version beyond 1.0.15 which contains proper input validation/sanitization for file path parameters. If no patched version exists, implement server-side validation to restrict include/require paths to allowed directories and disable allow_url_include.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-53565 — 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-2025-53565 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