Vulnerabilities (CVE)

Filtered by CWE-352
Total 9889 CVE
CVE Vendors Products Updated CVSS v2 CVSS v3
CVE-2026-107848 2026-10-16 N/A 3.5 LOW
Contao is an Open Source CMS. From version 4.0.0 until 5.3.50 and 5.7.12, RequestTokenListener validates REQUEST_TOKEN only for POST requests, while the declarative GET guard runs only when an act parameter is present. Backend actions dispatched through the key parameter can therefore execute without a CSRF token when an authenticated backend user loads an attacker-controlled URL. Reachable actions remain limited to modules available to that user, and the advisory demonstrates destructive or state-changing actions rather than privilege escalation. This issue is fixed in versions 5.3.50 and 5.7.12.
CVE-2026-111413 2026-10-16 N/A 8.8 HIGH
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in aThemeArt aThemeArt Theme Helper athemeart-theme-helper allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects aThemeArt Theme Helper: from n/a through 1.0.8.
CVE-2026-110015 2026-10-16 N/A 8.8 HIGH
The Salon Booking System WordPress plugin before 10.31.9 does not correctly verify the authenticity of REST API requests and discards WordPress core's nonce check for cookie-authenticated sessions across the whole REST API, allowing unauthenticated attackers who trick a logged-in administrator into clicking a crafted link to forge requests in that administrator's browser, up to creating a new administrator account.
CVE-2026-15046 2026-10-16 N/A 4.2 MEDIUM
The LitExtension WordPress plugin through 1.2.5 does not verify a nonce before an administrative action that overwrites the store-migration connector's authentication token, allowing attackers to take over the connector token by tricking a logged-in administrator into clicking a crafted link (CSRF).
CVE-2024-0858 1 Theinnovs 1 Innovs Hr 2026-10-16 N/A 8.8 HIGH
The Innovs HR WordPress plugin before 1.0.3.7.1 does not have CSRF checks in some places, which could allow attackers to make logged in users perform unwanted actions via CSRF attacks such as adding them as employees.
CVE-2025-66629 1 Hedgedoc 1 Hedgedoc 2026-10-15 N/A 3.7 LOW
HedgeDoc is an open source, real-time, collaborative, markdown notes application. Prior to 1.10.4, some of HedgeDoc's OAuth2 endpoints for social login providers such as Google, GitHub, GitLab, Facebook or Dropbox lack CSRF protection, since they don't send a state parameter and verify the response using this parameter. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.4.
CVE-2026-48211 2026-10-15 N/A 5.4 MEDIUM
An authenticated administrator can be induced to delete administrative Import/Export templates through a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attack. The OTRS AdminImportExport::TemplateDelete action does not validate the request's ChallengeToken, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to craft a malicious request that is executed with the privileges of an active administrator session. This issue affects OTRS: * 7.0.X * 8.0.X * 2023.X * 2024.X * 2025.X * 2026.X before 2026.7.X Please note that ((OTRS)) Community Edition 6.x and before are vulnerable. Products based on the ((OTRS)) Community Edition also very likely to be affected
CVE-2026-78358 2026-10-15 N/A 4.3 MEDIUM
Several administrative actions do not sufficiently validate whether a request was intentionally initiated by the authenticated user. In particular, the DBUpdateLogCleanUp action can be triggered through a GET request without validating a ChallengeToken. An unauthenticated remote attacker can therefore cause the browser of an authenticated administrator to execute the cleanup action by embedding a crafted request in a malicious web page. Successful exploitation can delete existing DBUpdate log entries. This may reduce the availability of diagnostic and historical information used for troubleshooting and auditing. The impact is limited to DBUpdate log entries that exist at the time the forged request is processed. Additional administrative endpoints were identified that do not validate a ChallengeToken. Some of these endpoints can trigger administrative actions such as deploying or synchronizing already existing configuration. They do not allow an attacker to introduce arbitrary new configuration through the CSRF request itself.  Export and read-only endpoints were also identified without ChallengeToken validation. While these endpoints may be triggered through a forged cross-site request, the response content remains subject to the browser's same-origin restrictions and is not automatically exposed to the attacker. Therefore, no direct confidentiality impact has been demonstrated for these endpoints. This issue affects OTRS: * 7.0.X * 8.0.X * 2023.X * 2024.X * 2025.X * 2026.X before 2026.7.X Please note that ((OTRS)) Community Edition 6.x and before are vulnerable. Products based on the ((OTRS)) Community Edition also very likely to be affected
CVE-2025-13629 2026-10-15 N/A 4.3 MEDIUM
The WP Landing Page plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 0.9.3. This is due to missing nonce validation on the 'wplp_api_update_text' function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update arbitrary post meta via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
CVE-2025-14117 1 Fit2cloud 1 Halo 2026-10-15 5.0 MEDIUM 4.3 MEDIUM
A vulnerability has been found in fit2cloud Halo 2.21.10. Impacted is an unknown function. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
CVE-2025-60912 1 Phpipam 1 Phpipam 2026-10-15 N/A 3.3 LOW
phpIPAM v1.7.3 contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the database export functionality. The generate-mysql.php function, located in the /app/admin/import-export/ endpoint, allows remote attackers to trigger large database dump downloads via crafted HTTP GET requests if an administrator has an active session.
CVE-2026-108800 2026-10-15 5.0 MEDIUM 4.3 MEDIUM
A vulnerability was identified in yangzongzhuan RuoYi 4.8.3. The affected element is an unknown function. Such manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack can be executed remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
CVE-2026-73597 1 Dell 1 Policy Manager For Secure Connect Gateway 2026-10-15 N/A 6.5 MEDIUM
Dell Secure Connect Gateway (SCG) Policy Manager, versions prior to 5.34.00.16, contains a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure, Information tampering, Launch of phishing attacks, and Protection mechanism bypass.
CVE-2026-33920 2026-10-15 N/A 3.5 LOW
A cross-site request forgery vulnerability was discovered in the login functionality (both standard and SAML) due to missing validation of the anti-CSRF token. An attacker with a valid account can trick a victim into unknowingly authenticating with the attacker's credentials. Any operation performed by the victim in this state is attributed to the attacker's account, compromising the integrity of the audit trail.
CVE-2015-5351 3 Apache, Canonical, Debian 3 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux 2026-10-14 6.8 MEDIUM 8.8 HIGH
The (1) Manager and (2) Host Manager applications in Apache Tomcat 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.31, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 establish sessions and send CSRF tokens for arbitrary new requests, which allows remote attackers to bypass a CSRF protection mechanism by using a token.
CVE-2025-42616 2026-10-14 N/A N/A
Some endpoints in vulnerability-lookup that modified application state (e.g. changing database entries, user data, configurations, or other privileged actions) may have been accessible via HTTP GET requests without requiring a CSRF token. This flaw leaves the application vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks: an attacker who tricks a logged-in user into visiting a malicious website could cause the user’s browser to issue GET requests that perform unintended state-changing operations in the context of their authenticated session. Because the server would treat these GET requests as valid (since no CSRF protection or POST method enforcement was in place), the attacker could exploit this to escalate privileges, change settings, or carry out other unauthorized actions without needing the user’s explicit consent or awareness.  The fix ensures that all state-changing endpoints now require HTTP POST requests and include a valid CSRF token. This enforces that state changes cannot be triggered by arbitrary cross-site GET requests. This issue affects Vulnerability-Lookup: before 2.18.0.
CVE-2025-34430 1 Fit2cloud 1 1panel 2026-10-14 N/A 4.3 MEDIUM
1Panel versions 1.10.33 through 2.0.15 contain a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the panel name management functionality. The affected endpoint does not implement CSRF defenses such as anti-CSRF tokens or Origin/Referer validation. An attacker can craft a malicious webpage that submits a panel-name change request; if a victim visits the page while authenticated, the browser includes valid session cookies and the request succeeds. This allows a remote attacker to change the victim’s panel name to an arbitrary value without consent.
CVE-2025-65472 1 Easyimages2.0 Project 1 Easyimages2.0 2026-10-14 N/A 8.8 HIGH
A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in the /admin/admin.inc.php component of EasyImages 2.0 v2.8.6 and below allows attackers to escalate privileges to Administrator via user interaction with a malicious web page.
CVE-2025-67598 2026-10-14 N/A 4.3 MEDIUM
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in PSM Plugins SupportCandy supportcandy allows Cross Site Request Forgery.This issue affects SupportCandy: from n/a through <= 3.4.1.
CVE-2025-67639 1 Jenkins 1 Jenkins 2026-10-14 N/A 3.5 LOW
A cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Jenkins 2.540 and earlier, LTS 2.528.2 and earlier allows attackers to trick users into logging in to the attacker's account.