dbcve.org
Code InjectionWeakness · CWE-94

CVE-2025-5392

CRITICAL · 9.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-07-11
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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
The GB Forms DB plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.2 via the gbfdb_talk_to_front() function. This is due to the function accepting user input and then passing that through call_user_func(). This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to execute code on the server which can be leverage to inject backdoors or create new administrative user accounts to name a few things.

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 confidence

The GB Forms DB WordPress plugin (versions up to 1.0.2) contains a critical Remote Code Execution vulnerability in the gbfdb_talk_to_front() function. The function directly passes unsanitized user input to PHP's call_user_func(), allowing unauthenticated attackers to execute arbitrary PHP functions on the server by supplying the function name as a request parameter.

MitigationUpdate to a patched version of GB Forms DB if available; otherwise, disable the plugin immediately. The fix requires removing direct user input from call_user_func() calls and implementing proper input validation with a whitelist of allowed functions.

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
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify GB Forms DB plugin is installed
    Check for the existence of the plugin directory at wp-content/plugins/gb-forms-db/ or list installed WordPress plugins via WP-CLI: wp plugin list --name='GB Forms DB'
    Affected if The plugin directory exists or the plugin appears in the installed plugins list
  2. Determine the installed plugin version
    Open the main plugin file (usually gb-forms-db.php) in wp-content/plugins/gb-forms-db/ and locate the Version header comment, or run: grep -i 'Version:' wp-content/plugins/gb-forms-db/*.php
    Affected if The reported version is 1.0.2 or lower (any version up to and including 1.0.2)
  3. Locate the vulnerable gbfdb_talk_to_front() function
    Search the plugin files for the function definition: grep -r 'function gbfdb_talk_to_front' wp-content/plugins/gb-forms-db/
    Affected if The function exists in the codebase, indicating the vulnerable code is present
  4. Confirm call_user_func() usage with user input
    Examine the gbfdb_talk_to_front() function and verify it contains a call_user_func() call that uses a request parameter (e.g., $_GET, $_POST) without sanitization
    Affected if The function directly passes unsanitized user input (from $_GET, $_POST, etc.) to call_user_func()
  5. Test if the vulnerable endpoint is reachable
    Send a GET or POST request to any page on the site with a parameter that matches the function name parameter used in gbfdb_talk_to_front() (parameter name varies based on plugin code)
    Affected if The server responds and the parameter is processed by the vulnerable function without authentication

You are affected if GB Forms DB plugin version 1.0.2 or lower is installed and the gbfdb_talk_to_front() function with unsafe call_user_func() usage is present and accessible.

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

Update to a patched version of GB Forms DB if available; otherwise, disable the plugin immediately. The fix requires removing direct user input from call_user_func() calls and implementing proper input validation with a whitelist of allowed functions.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-5392 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2025-5392 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