CVE-2025-9946
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 LockerPress – WordPress Security Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. 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 · moderate confidenceThe LockerPress WordPress security plugin version 1.0 and below lacks proper nonce validation on a specific function, allowing unauthenticated attackers to forge administrative requests. This CSRF vulnerability enables attackers to modify plugin settings and 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 LockerPress plugin is installedNavigate to WordPress admin dashboard > Plugins > Installed Plugins. Look for 'LockerPress' in the list of active or inactive plugins.Affected if LockerPress plugin appears in the plugins list and is activated
-
Identify installed LockerPress versionIn the plugins list, click on 'LockerPress' to view plugin details, or check the plugin file header in /wp-content/plugins/lockerpress/ folder for the 'Version' declared value.Affected if The version listed is 1.0 or any version up to and including 1.0
-
Verify plugin settings are accessible via URLCheck if the plugin creates any admin menu pages (under Settings or Tools in WordPress admin). Try accessing those pages while logged in as administrator to confirm the plugin settings interface exists.Affected if Plugin settings pages exist and are accessible to administrators
-
Inspect plugin for unexpected settings or script injectionsAccess the LockerPress settings pages in the WordPress admin. Look for any unfamiliar settings, especially fields that accept code or URLs, or any saved values that contain suspicious JavaScript tags, base64 strings, or external URLs.Affected if Plugin settings contain unknown URLs, script tags, or suspicious encoded content that was not intentionally configured
A user is affected if the LockerPress plugin version 1.0 or below is installed and active, as the lack of nonce validation on admin functions could allow settings modification through CSRF attacks.
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 dataImplement proper nonce validation on the vulnerable function and consider adding CSRF tokens to all state-changing operations. Administrators should avoid clicking untrusted links until a patch is applied.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-9946 — 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-2025-9946 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