CVE-2025-9883
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 Browser Sniff plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.3. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on a function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update settings and inject malicious web scripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
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 · high confidenceThe Browser Sniff WordPress plugin (versions up to 2.3) lacks proper nonce validation on certain functions, allowing unauthenticated attackers to forge administrative requests. This CSRF vulnerability permits attackers to modify plugin settings and potentially inject malicious web scripts by tricking site administrators into clicking crafted links.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/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.
-
Confirm Browser Sniff plugin is installedIn WordPress admin, navigate to Plugins > Installed Plugins and search for 'Browser Sniff', or inspect the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for a browser-sniff related folderAffected if The plugin folder exists in the WordPress plugins directory
-
Identify the installed versionClick on the Browser Sniff plugin in the WordPress plugins list to view its details, or open the main plugin PHP file and locate the 'Version' header in the plugin comment blockAffected if The version displayed is 2.3 or any version number lower than 2.3
-
Check if plugin settings functions existLocate and review the main plugin PHP files, looking for functions that handle settings updates, configuration changes, or any admin action handlers (often found in files like admin.php, settings.php, or the main plugin file)Affected if The plugin contains settings or configuration functions that modify plugin behavior
-
Inspect for missing nonce validationExamine the identified settings/state-changing functions for presence of WordPress nonce verification functions: wp_nonce_field(), check_admin_referer(), wp_verify_nonce(), or nonce_validation in AJAX handlersAffected if State-changing functions lack nonce validation calls or contain only superficial checks that can be bypassed via CSRF
If the Browser Sniff plugin is installed at version 2.3 or below and the code shows missing or insufficient nonce validation on settings modification functions, the environment is affected by CVE-2025-9883
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 the plugin to a patched version once available. Until then, verify that all state-changing operations include proper WordPress nonce validation and consider implementing additional CSRF protections such as SameSite cookie attributes.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9883 — 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-2025-9883 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