CVE-2026-57641
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 · uneditedUnauthenticated Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in Real Estate 7 <= 3.5.9 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 · moderate confidenceUnauthenticated Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Real Estate 7 theme versions 3.5.9 and earlier allows attackers to trick authenticated users into performing unintended actions via forged requests, as the application lacks proper CSRF token validation.
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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Identify Real Estate 7 theme versionLocate the theme styles.css file (typically at /wp-content/themes/realestate-7/style.css) and look for the 'Version:' declaration in the file header, or check via WordPress admin Appearance > ThemesAffected if The version listed is 3.5.9 or lower
-
Verify CSRF token implementation in formsInspect the theme's PHP files that handle state-changing operations (such as forms for saving settings, submitting inquiries, or updating data). Look for WordPress nonce verification using functions like wp_verify_nonce, check_admin_referer, or nonce_fieldAffected if No CSRF tokens/nonces are found in forms that perform state-changing actions, or nonce verification is missing entirely
-
Check for anti-CSRF token validation on submissionsReview form handling code paths in theme files (commonly in functions.php or included template files). Search for presence of nonce validation logic before processing any POST or GET requests that modify dataAffected if Form submissions process without calling nonce verification functions, meaning forged requests would be accepted
-
Inspect session cookie configurationIf accessible, examine how session or authentication cookies are set in the theme. Check if SameSite attribute is configured on cookies, or review the wp-config.php for cookie settingsAffected if Cookies are set without SameSite attributes (or SameSite is set to None without Secure flag), leaving the application vulnerable to CSRF via cross-site cookie leakage
A user is affected if the Real Estate 7 theme version is 3.5.9 or earlier AND the theme lacks CSRF token validation on state-changing operations.
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 Real Estate 7 to a patched version above 3.5.9, or implement anti-CSRF tokens on state-changing operations and configure SameSite attributes on session cookies.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57641 — 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-2026-57641 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