Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2026-22342

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-17
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Unauthenticated Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in WordPress Dating Theme <= 11.2.0 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 · high confidence

An unauthenticated Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in WordPress Dating Theme versions 11.2.0 and below. Attackers can trick authenticated users into unknowingly submitting malicious requests to the affected WordPress site, potentially allowing unauthorized actions such as modifying settings or performing administrative tasks without proper consent.

MitigationImplement anti-CSRF tokens (nonces) on all state-changing forms and AJAX endpoints within the theme, validate the Referer header on POST requests, and set the SameSite attribute on session cookies. If a patched version is available, upgrade to that version.

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 checks

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

  1. Identify if WordPress Dating Theme is installed
    Navigate to wp-content/themes/ in your WordPress installation directory and look for a theme folder named 'dating' or similar. Check the theme's style.css file for the theme name.
    Affected if The dating theme folder exists in the themes directory.
  2. Confirm the installed theme version
    Open the theme's style.css file (wp-content/themes/dating/style.css) and look for the 'Version:' declaration in the file header comment. Alternatively, check version.php in the theme folder.
    Affected if The version listed is 11.2.0 or below.
  3. Verify the theme is active
    In the WordPress admin dashboard, go to Appearance > Themes and confirm the Dating theme is currently activated.
    Affected if The dating theme is the active theme.
  4. Inspect forms for missing CSRF tokens
    Examine PHP files in the theme for form submissions (POST requests). Search for forms that submit to admin-post.php, custom handlers, or AJAX endpoints. Check if each form includes a nonce field (wp_nonce_field, wp_create_nonce, or similar) or validates a token.
    Affected if State-changing forms exist without nonce verification.
  5. Check AJAX endpoints for nonce validation
    Search theme PHP files for add_action('wp_ajax_') and add_action('wp_ajax_nopriv_') handlers. For each handler, verify it calls check_ajax_referer or wp_verify_nonce to validate the request origin.
    Affected if AJAX endpoints handle state-changing actions without nonce verification.

You are affected if the WordPress Dating Theme is active, version 11.2.0 or below, and forms or AJAX endpoints lack CSRF token (nonce) validation.

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 anti-CSRF tokens (nonces) on all state-changing forms and AJAX endpoints within the theme, validate the Referer header on POST requests, and set the SameSite attribute on session cookies. If a patched version is available, upgrade to that version.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-22342 — 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-2026-22342 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