CVE-2025-69109
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 · uneditedUnauthenticated Local File Inclusion in Raider Spirit <= 1.1.2 versions.
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 confidenceUnauthenticated Local File Inclusion (LFI) vulnerability in Raider Spirit plugin/theme versions 1.1.2 and below allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files on the server via directory traversal sequences in unsanitized input parameters.
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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/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.
-
Verify Raider Spirit installation existsCheck for the Raider Spirit plugin/theme files in your WordPress plugins directory (wp-content/plugins/) or themes directory (wp-content/themes/). Look for a folder named 'raider-spirit' or similar.Affected if The plugin/theme folder is present on the server
-
Confirm installed version numberLocate the main plugin/theme file (e.g., index.php, style.css, or readme.txt) and check the version header declared in the file metadata. Compare this version to 1.1.2 or lower.Affected if The declared version is 1.1.2 or any version below 1.1.2
-
Identify file path input parametersReview the plugin/theme source code for PHP files that accept user-supplied file paths via GET/POST parameters (common parameter names include 'file', 'path', 'template', 'page', 'include', or 'load').Affected if The code accepts file path parameters without apparent sanitization
-
Check for directory traversal protectionInspect the code handling file path parameters to verify if it filters or blocks directory traversal sequences ('../', '..\', or encoded equivalents). Look for use of basename(), realpath(), or explicit allow-list validation.Affected if No traversal protection is found in the parameter handling code, allowing '../' sequences to pass through unsanitized
-
Verify unauthenticated access is possibleConfirm the vulnerable file inclusion code is reachable without authentication - check that the code does not require login, capability checks, or nonce verification before processing the file path parameter.Affected if The file path parameter can be accessed by unauthenticated users (no login_required, current_user check, or nonce validation present)
You are affected if Raider Spirit version 1.1.2 or below is installed AND the plugin/theme accepts unsanitized file path parameters that can be accessed by unauthenticated users, allowing directory traversal to read arbitrary files.
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 dataUpgrade to a version higher than 1.1.2, or implement strict input validation and path sanitization to block directory traversal sequences (e.g., ../, ..\) in all user-supplied file path parameters.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-69109 — 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-2025-69109 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