Missing AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-862

CVE-2025-67967

HIGH · 7.6 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-01-22
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable 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
Missing Authorization vulnerability in e-plugins Lawyer Directory lawyer-directory allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Lawyer Directory: from n/a through <= 1.3.3.

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 confidence

The Lawyer Directory plugin for WordPress (versions <= 1.3.3) contains a missing authorization vulnerability allowing attackers to exploit incorrectly configured access control security levels. This IDOR or privilege escalation issue permits unauthorized users to access administrative functions or sensitive data that should require higher privilege levels.

MitigationUpdate to the latest patched version of the Lawyer Directory plugin. If no patch is available, audit the plugin code for all sensitive functions and implement proper capability checks (e.g., current_user_can()) before executing privileged operations.

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L

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. Check Lawyer Directory plugin version
    In WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and find 'Lawyer Directory', or check the plugin's main PHP file for the 'Version' header in the plugin comment block
    Affected if The installed version is 1.3.3 or lower
  2. Verify plugin is active
    Confirm the Lawyer Directory plugin is currently activated in the WordPress plugins list
    Affected if The plugin is active and the version is vulnerable
  3. Inspect admin functions for capability checks
    Examine the plugin's PHP files (especially in /admin or /includes folders) for sensitive functions like settings, user management, or data export. Look for missing current_user_can() or similar authorization checks before privileged operations
    Affected if Admin or privileged functions lack proper capability verification before execution
  4. Check for exposed AJAX or REST endpoints
    Review the plugin for wp_ajax_ and wp_ajax_nopriv_ hooks that may allow unauthenticated or low-privilege users to trigger privileged actions
    Affected if The plugin registers AJAX or REST endpoints accessible without proper authorization checks
  5. Test access control with low-privilege account
    Create or use a subscriber-level user account and attempt to access plugin admin pages or trigger plugin administrative actions directly via URL or API
    Affected if A low-privilege user can access administrative functions or sensitive data they should not be able to reach

You are affected if the Lawyer Directory plugin version is 1.3.3 or lower AND sensitive plugin functions can be accessed or executed by unauthorized users without proper capability verification.

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 the latest patched version of the Lawyer Directory plugin. If no patch is available, audit the plugin code for all sensitive functions and implement proper capability checks (e.g., current_user_can()) before executing privileged operations.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-67967 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-67967 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