CVE-2025-9890
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 Theme Editor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the 'theme_editor_theme' page. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to achieve remote code execution 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 Theme Editor WordPress plugin fails to implement proper nonce validation on the theme_editor_theme page, allowing attackers to forge administrative requests. This CSRF vulnerability can be chained to achieve Remote Code Execution by tricking an admin into clicking a malicious link that triggers theme file modifications.
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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Locate the Theme Editor plugin installationCheck the WordPress plugins directory (wp-content/plugins) for a folder named 'theme-editor' or similar. In WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and look for 'Theme Editor' or 'WP Theme Editor'.Affected if The plugin is present in the plugins directory or listed in the WordPress admin plugins list
-
Identify the installed plugin versionOpen the main plugin file (usually theme-editor.php or similar in the plugin folder) and look for the 'Version' header in the plugin comment block. Alternatively, check the readme.txt file in the plugin folder for the version number.Affected if The version number found is lower than 3.1 (e.g., 3.0, 2.x, 1.x) or no version is displayed (indicating an unpatched build)
-
Verify the plugin is activeIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and check if the Theme Editor plugin shows as 'Active'.Affected if The plugin is currently active on the WordPress site
-
Confirm admin access to theme editingLog in as an administrator and navigate to Appearance > Theme Editor (or the equivalent menu item provided by the Theme Editor plugin). Verify the theme_editor_theme page is accessible.Affected if The theme editor interface loads and allows access to modify theme files (this page is where the CSRF vulnerability exists)
A user is affected if the Theme Editor plugin is installed, active, and the installed version is below 3.1, since the missing nonce validation on the theme_editor_theme page can be exploited via a crafted link.
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 Theme Editor plugin to the latest patched version (3.1+). Until then, avoid clicking untrusted links while logged into WordPress admin and consider disabling the plugin if not actively used.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9890 — 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-2025-9890 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