Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.13% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE Intelligencepokornydavid · Restore Permanently delete Post or Page Data
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verifiedThe Restore Permanently delete Post or Page Data plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the rp_dpo_dpa_ajax_dp_delete_data() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete data via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
The Restore Permanently delete Post or Page Data plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the rp_dpo_dpa_ajax_dp_delete_data() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete data via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
The Restore Permanently delete Post or Page Data plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the rp_dpo_dpa_ajax_dp_delete_data() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete data via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
The application accepts a state-changing browser request without a reliable anti-forgery check.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF). 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.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 23 Aug 2025 · Last source change 8 Apr 2026, 17:06 UTC · CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.