Replyable: Cross-Site Request Forgery
CVE-2022-4265 is a high-severity cross-site request forgery vulnerability in Replyable, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 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 2.2.10 as the first without the flaw, so updating Replyable to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.51% 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 Replyable to 2.2.10 or a later version.
Affected products and versions
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
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- 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:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
Official description
The Replyable WordPress plugin before 2.2.10 does not validate the class name submitted by the request when instantiating an object in the prompt_dismiss_notice action and also lacks CSRF check in the related action. This could allow any authenticated users, such as subscriber to perform Object Injection attacks. The attack could also be done via a CSRF vector against any authenticated user
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: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Technical write-ups (may include proof of concept)
- wpscan.com/vulnerability/095cba08-7edd-41fb-9776-da151c0885ddExploit, Third Party Advisory
Recent Cross-Site Request Forgery vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.