Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.17% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceUnknown · JetStyleManager for Gutenberg
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 JetStyleManager for Gutenberg WordPress plugin before 1.3.9 does not have CSRF protection on some of its AJAX actions, allowing attackers to make a logged-in user with the edit_posts capability (Contributor and above) delete or modify custom widget skins via a crafted request, provided they can trick the user into performing an action such as clicking a link.
The JetStyleManager for Gutenberg WordPress plugin before 1.3.9 does not have CSRF protection on some of its AJAX actions, allowing attackers to make a logged-in user with the edit_posts capability (Contributor and above) delete or modify custom widget skins via a crafted request, provided they can trick the user into performing an action such as clicking 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 JetStyleManager for Gutenberg WordPress plugin before 1.3.9 does not have CSRF protection on some of its AJAX actions, allowing attackers to make a logged-in user with the edit_posts capability (Contributor and above) delete or modify custom widget skins via a crafted request, provided they can trick the user into performing an action such as clicking 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 2 Sept 2026 · Last source change 2 Sept 2026, 10:45 UTC · CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
Missing structured fields: affected product. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.