CVE-2025-6792
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 One to one user Chat by WPGuppy plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized access of data due to a missing capability check on the /wp-json/guppylite/v2/channel-authorize rest endpoint in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.4. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to intercept and view private chat messages between users.
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 confidenceThe One to one user Chat by WPGuppy WordPress plugin has a missing capability check on the /wp-json/guppylite/v2/channel-authorize REST API endpoint in versions up to 1.1.4. This allows unauthenticated attackers to access the endpoint and view private chat messages between users due to broken access control.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/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 the plugin is installed and get its versionNavigate to WordPress admin > Plugins > Installed Plugins, locate 'One to one user Chat by WPGuppy' (or 'WPGuppy One to One Chat'), and note the version number displayedAffected if The installed version is 1.1.4 or any lower version (any version up to and including 1.1.4)
-
Confirm the REST API is enabledThe WordPress REST API is enabled by default. Verify by attempting a simple REST request to any standard WordPress endpoint (e.g., GET /wp-json/) - a successful response indicates the REST API is activeAffected if The REST API is enabled (default WordPress behavior) and the vulnerable plugin is installed in an affected version
-
Test access to the vulnerable endpointSend an unauthenticated HTTP GET request to /wp-json/guppylite/v2/channel-authorize and observe the response. A 200 OK response with channel or authorization data indicates the endpoint is accessible without authenticationAffected if The endpoint returns any data (instead of a 401 Unauthorized or 403 Forbidden error) and the plugin version is 1.1.4 or lower
-
Inspect plugin files for the vulnerable REST routeUsing a file manager or FTP, navigate to /wp-content/plugins/ and locate the WPGuppy chat plugin folder. Examine the includes/class-*.php or class-guppy-*.php file where REST routes are registered. Look for the register_rest_route call for '/guppylite/v2/channel-authorize' and verify if capability checks are presentAffected if The REST route registration lacks a 'permission_callback' or uses a weak permission check that allows unauthenticated access
A user is affected if the One to one user Chat by WPGuppy plugin is installed at version 1.1.4 or lower AND the REST API is enabled, allowing unauthenticated access to the /wp-json/guppylite/v2/channel-authorize endpoint.
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 the latest patched version of the plugin once available, or disable the plugin until a patch is released. Consider deploying a WAF rule to block unauthorized access to the vulnerable REST endpoint as an interim measure.
- Consultation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-6792 — 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-2025-6792 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