CVE-2025-5811
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 · uneditedThe Listly: Listicles For WordPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the Init() function in all versions up to, and including, 2.7. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary transient values on the WordPress site.
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 confidenceThe Listly WordPress plugin has a broken access control vulnerability where the Init() function lacks a capability check, allowing unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary WordPress transients. This could lead to denial of service or manipulation of transient-based site functionality.
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
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
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 Listly plugin is installedCheck for the Listly plugin directory at wp-content/plugins/listly/ and locate the main plugin file (listly.php) or readme.txt to identify the installed version number.Affected if The plugin is present and the version is below 2.8 (versions prior to the capability check fix).
-
Retrieve installed version numberOpen the plugin's main PHP file or readme.txt in wp-content/plugins/listly/ and locate the version declaration (often near the top comments or in the 'Version' header).Affected if The version returned is less than 2.8.0 or the version cannot be determined (treat as potentially affected).
-
Confirm plugin is activeCheck the WordPress admin under Plugins > Installed Plugins, or query the wp_options table for the option_name 'active_plugins' to verify listly is in the active plugins list.Affected if The Listly plugin is currently activated and the version is below 2.8.
-
Test unauthenticated transient deletion accessSend an HTTP request to the plugin's init endpoint (typically a POST to the admin-ajax.php action or a direct plugin AJAX handler) without providing authentication cookies or a nonce, attempting to delete a WordPress transient using the vulnerable function.Affected if The request succeeds and the transient is deleted without any authentication or capability verification error (indicating the Init() function lacks a capability check).
The environment is affected if the Listly WordPress plugin is installed, activated, and the version is below 2.8, allowing unauthenticated transient deletion due to missing capability checks on the Init() function.
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 dataUpdate to version 2.8 or later which includes the missing capability check on the Init() function. Until then, consider disabling the plugin or implementing web application firewall rules to block malicious transient deletion requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-5811 — 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-2025-5811 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