CVE-2025-5926
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 Link Shield plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 0.5.4. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the link_shield_menu_options() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update settings and inject malicious web scripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
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 Link Shield WordPress plugin lacks proper nonce validation on its link_shield_menu_options() function, allowing unauthenticated attackers to forge administrative requests that can modify plugin settings and inject malicious scripts via CSRF attacks.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/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.
-
Confirm Link Shield plugin installation and versionCheck WordPress plugins directory for link-shield folder, or inspect the main plugin file header for 'Version:' value. In WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and locate Link Shield to see the version number.Affected if The plugin is installed and the version cannot be confirmed as patched or is older than the patched release.
-
Locate the vulnerable function fileNavigate to wp-content/plugins/link-shield/ and identify the file containing link_shield_menu_options() function, typically the main plugin PHP file.Affected if The function link_shield_menu_options() exists in the plugin files.
-
Inspect the function for nonce validationOpen the file containing link_shield_menu_options() and search for 'nonce' or 'wp_verify_nonce' within that function. Check if the function processes $_POST or $_GET requests without verifying a nonce token first.Affected if The function processes settings changes without calling wp_verify_nonce() or checking a nonce value.
-
Verify admin settings for unauthorized changesIn WordPress admin, navigate to the Link Shield settings page (typically under Settings menu). Review all configured URLs, links, and options for any suspicious or unexpected entries, especially scripts or unfamiliar redirect targets.Affected if Settings contain unexpected JavaScript, unfamiliar URLs, or changes not made by authorized administrators.
A user is affected if the Link Shield plugin is installed and its link_shield_menu_options() function lacks nonce validation for request processing.
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 the plugin to a patched version once available; in the interim, review admin settings for unauthorized changes and warn administrators about clicking untrusted links.
- Consultation1.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-5926 — 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-2025-5926 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