CVE-2025-65593
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 · uneditednopCommerce 4.90.0 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the Schedule Tasks functionality.
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 confidencenopCommerce 4.90.0 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the Schedule Tasks administration functionality. An authenticated administrator can be tricked into unknowingly submitting malicious requests that modify or create scheduled tasks, allowing attackers to abuse the task scheduler for unauthorized operations.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 4.90.0CVSS 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 nopCommerce versionCheck the installed version by accessing the admin dashboard (usually /Admin) and looking at the version displayed, or check the version file in the application root or bin directoryAffected if Version is exactly 4.90.0
-
Locate Schedule Tasks admin functionalityNavigate to the admin panel and find the Schedule Tasks section, typically under Configuration or System menusAffected if The Schedule Tasks functionality is accessible in the admin panel
-
Inspect HTML forms for anti-CSRF tokensOpen the Schedule Tasks page in a browser, view page source, and search for CSRF protection tokens (such as __RequestVerificationToken, AntiForgeryToken, or similar) in the forms that create or modify scheduled tasksAffected if No anti-CSRF token is present in the POST forms for schedule task operations
-
Verify Origin/Referer header validationUse browser developer tools to capture a POST request when saving a schedule task, then check if the server validates the Origin or Referer headers before processing the requestAffected if The server accepts requests without validating Origin or Referer headers
You are affected if running nopCommerce version 4.90.0 and the Schedule Tasks admin forms lack anti-CSRF tokens or do not validate request origins
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 anti-CSRF synchronizer tokens for all state-changing operations in the Schedule Tasks functionality and validate Origin/Referer headers on POST requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-65593 — 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-2025-65593 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