Missing AuthorizationWeakness · CWE-862

CVE-2025-69388

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-02-20
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
71/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
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 cliengo Cliengo – Chatbot cliengo allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels.This issue affects Cliengo – Chatbot: from n/a through <= 3.0.4.

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

This is a Missing Authorization vulnerability in the Cliengo Chatbot WordPress plugin that allows attackers to exploit incorrectly configured access control security levels. The vulnerability stems from missing or improper authorization checks that should enforce user permissions before granting access to sensitive functionality or data.

MitigationImplement proper authorization checks at all access points requiring authentication, enforce role-based access control (RBAC), and verify user permissions before executing privileged operations. Update to the latest patched version when available.

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
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm Cliengo Chatbot plugin is installed
    Navigate to WordPress Admin > Plugins and look for 'Cliengo Chatbot' in the list of installed plugins, or check the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for a cliengo folder
    Affected if The plugin is installed and active
  2. Identify installed version
    In WordPress Admin > Plugins, find the Cliengo Chatbot plugin and note the version number displayed, or check the plugin's main PHP file for the 'Version' header comment
    Affected if Version is at or below the affected version range (verify against published advisory)
  3. Check for unauthenticated AJAX endpoints
    Review the plugin's PHP files for AJAX action handlers (wp_ajax_ and wp_ajax_nopriv_ hooks) and verify if sensitive operations lack current_user_can() or capability checks
    Affected if AJAX endpoints handling sensitive data lack proper capability verification
  4. Test low-privilege user access to admin actions
    Create or use a subscriber-level user account and attempt to access plugin admin pages or trigger plugin-related actions via direct URL or AJAX calls
    Affected if Lower-privileged users can access functionality that should require administrator permissions
  5. Audit capability checks in plugin functions
    Search plugin PHP files for 'current_user_can', 'manage_options', or 'administrator' capability checks around sensitive functions (settings changes, user data access, API key retrieval)
    Affected if No capability checks found before privileged operations

A user is affected if the Cliengo Chatbot plugin is installed and either the version falls within the vulnerable range or certain admin/actions are accessible without proper authorization 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

Implement proper authorization checks at all access points requiring authentication, enforce role-based access control (RBAC), and verify user permissions before executing privileged operations. Update to the latest patched version when available.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,780
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,848.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-69388 — 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-2025-69388 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