DPD Baltic Shipping: Cross-Site Request Forgery
CVE-2022-3999 is a high-severity cross-site request forgery vulnerability in DPD Baltic Shipping, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.1 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists version 1.2.57 as the first without the flaw, so updating DPD Baltic Shipping to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.45% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update DPD Baltic Shipping to 1.2.57 or a later version.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| DPD Baltic Shipping | DPD Baltic Shipping | before 1.2.57 | 1.2.57 |
| Dpdgroup | Woocommerce Shipping | 1.2.11 and earlier | Not stated |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 8.1 | High | NVD |
| CVSS 3.1 | 8.1 | High | CISA (ADP) |
Official description
The DPD Baltic Shipping WordPress plugin before 1.2.57 does not have authorisation and CSRF in an AJAX action, which could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to delete arbitrary options from the blog, which could make the blog unavailable.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Cross-Site Request Forgery
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF.
- Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
- Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330).
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Technical write-ups (may include proof of concept)
- wpscan.com/vulnerability/625ae924-68db-4579-a34f-e6f33aa33643Exploit, Third Party Advisory
Recent Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.3 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.