| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Jensen of Scandinavia AS Air:Link 3G (AL3G) version 2.23m (Rev. 3), Air:Link 5000AC (AL5000AC) version 1.13, and Air:Link 59300 (AL59300) version 1.04 (Rev. 4) devices allow remote attackers to conduct CSRF attacks via certain /goform/* pages. |
| In Hitachi Vantara Pentaho BA Platform through 8.0, a CSRF issue exists in the Business Analytics application. |
| A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Chamilo LMS 1.11.26 "/main/social/home.php," allows attackers to initiate a request that posts a fake post onto the user's social wall without their consent or knowledge. |
| The MF Gig Calendar WordPress plugin through 1.2.1 does not have CSRF checks in some places, which could allow attackers to make logged in Contributors and above delete arbitrary events via a CSRF attack |
| 07FLYCMS V1.3.9 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component 'erp.07fly.net:80/admin/SysNotifyUser/del.html?id=93'. |
| 07FLYCMS V1.3.9 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component http://erp.07fly.net:80/oa/OaSchedule/add.html. |
| Vulnerability in the Oracle Commerce Platform product of Oracle Commerce (component: Dynamo Personalization Server). Supported versions that are affected are 11.3.0, 11.3.1 and 11.3.2. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows low privileged attacker with network access via HTTP to compromise Oracle Commerce Platform. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in Oracle Commerce Platform, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Oracle Commerce Platform accessible data as well as unauthorized read access to a subset of Oracle Commerce Platform accessible data. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 5.4 (Confidentiality and Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N). |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Brain Storm Force Ultimate Addons for WPBakery Page Builder.This issue affects Ultimate Addons for WPBakery Page Builder: from n/a through 3.19.17.
|
| FlyCms v1.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the component /system/site/userconfig_updagte. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in wp.Insider, wpaffiliatemgr Affiliates Manager.This issue affects Affiliates Manager: from n/a through 2.9.31.
|
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in СleanTalk - Anti-Spam Protection Spam protection, Anti-Spam, FireWall by CleanTalk.This issue affects Spam protection, Anti-Spam, FireWall by CleanTalk: from n/a through 6.20.
|
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Yevhen Kotelnytskyi JS & CSS Script Optimizer.This issue affects JS & CSS Script Optimizer: from n/a through 0.3.3.
|
| Pat Infinite Solutions HelpdeskAdvanced <= 11.0.33 is vulnerable to Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) via the WSCView function. |
| The Registration Forms WordPress plugin before 3.8.1.3 does not have authorisation and CSRF when deleting users via an init action handler, allowing unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary users (along with their posts) |
| A cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Jenkins Simple Queue Plugin 1.4.6 and earlier allows attackers to change and reset the build queue order. |
| The Event Tickets with Ticket Scanner WordPress plugin before 2.5.4 does not have CSRF check in place when updating its settings, which could allow attackers to make a logged in admin change them via a CSRF attack |
| GetSimple CMS CE 3.3.19 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in the backend plugin module. |
| FlyCms v1.0 was discovered to contain a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability via the /system/share/ztree_category_edit. |
| All versions of Uffizio GPS Tracker may allow an attacker to perform unintended actions on behalf of a user. |
| Elcomplus SmartPTT SCADA Server web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a well-formed, valid, consistent request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request. |