Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-1570

Auth Bypass in Wpwax Directorist ≤ 8.2

Published
28 February 2025
Modified
06 March 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 8.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0043 35th percentile
Risk Priority 59 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-1570 is a high-severity Weak Password Recovery Mechanism for Forgotten Password (CWE-640) vulnerability in Wpwax Directorist. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Valid Accounts (T1078); ranked at the 35th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as Other Platforms; in the Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms risk domain.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to IA-12 (Identity Proofing) and IA-5 (Authenticator Management) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

CVE-2025-1570 is a privilege escalation vulnerability via account takeover affecting the Directorist: AI-Powered Business Directory Plugin with Classified Ads Listings for WordPress in all versions up to and including 8.1. The flaw arises from inadequate controls in the directorist_generate_password_reset_pin_code() and reset_user_password() functions, which fail to prevent brute force attacks on one-time passwords (OTPs) or verify that password reset requests originate from authorized users. This CWE-640 issue carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.1 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating high severity due to its potential for confidentially, integrity, and availability impacts.

Unauthenticated attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely over the network, though it requires high attack complexity. By generating OTPs and brute-forcing them, attackers can reset passwords for any user account, including administrators, achieving full account takeover and subsequent control over the WordPress site.

Advisories reference a patch in the WordPress plugins trac at changeset 3246340 for Directorist, with additional details available in Wordfence threat intelligence. Security practitioners should update to a plugin version beyond 8.1 to mitigate the issue.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

The Directorist: AI-Powered Business Directory Plugin with Classified Ads Listings plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to privilege escalation via account takeover in all versions up to, and including, 8.1. This is due to the directorist_generate_password_reset_pin_code() and reset_user_password() functions not having…

more

enough controls to prevent a successful brute force attack of the OTP to change a password, or verify that a password reset request came from an authorized user. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to generate and brute force an OTP that makes it possible to change any users passwords, including an administrator.

CWE(s)

AI Security AnalysisAI

AI Category
Other Platforms
Risk Domain
Other ATLAS/OWASP Terms
OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
None mapped
Classification Reason
Matched keywords: ai

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1078 Valid Accounts Stealth
Adversaries may obtain and abuse credentials of existing accounts as a means of gaining Initial Access, Persistence, Privilege Escalation, or Defense Evasion.
T1110 Brute Force Credential Access
Adversaries may use brute force techniques to gain access to accounts when passwords are unknown or when password hashes are obtained.
T1110.001 Password Guessing Credential Access
Adversaries with no prior knowledge of legitimate credentials within the system or environment may guess passwords to attempt access to accounts.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-12041Same product: Wpwax Directorist
CVE-2024-1322Same product: Wpwax Directorist
CVE-2023-2252Same product: Wpwax Directorist
CVE-2023-1889Same product: Wpwax Directorist
CVE-2023-1888Same product: Wpwax Directorist
CVE-2023-41798Same product: Wpwax Directorist
CVE-2024-0186Shared CWE-640
CVE-2025-50433Shared CWE-640
CVE-2023-43650Shared CWE-640
CVE-2026-9273Shared CWE-640

Affected Assets

wpwax
directorist
≤ 8.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V7.4.3

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Identity proofing at appropriate assurance levels ensures forgotten-password recovery cannot succeed without strong verification of the user.

Authenticator management requires secure distribution, reset, and verification procedures that directly address weak password recovery flows.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.AA-01 mostly match
prevents

Credential lifecycle management directly includes password reset/recovery flows.

PR.AA-02 mostly match
prevents

Identity proofing is the core control that prevents weak or bypassed recovery mechanisms.

PR.AA-03 partial match
prevents

Authentication policy covers strength/MFA but does not address recovery path weaknesses.

PR.PS-06 partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC reduces implementation flaws but is not specific to password-recovery design.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

degrades

Strong authentication-information lifecycle rules directly address weak password-recovery flows.

prevents

Secure-SDLC practices can embed strong recovery design, yet the control is broader than this single weakness.

prevents

Application-security requirements can mandate secure recovery flows, but the control covers many other requirements.

prevents

Secure-coding standards can prevent weak recovery implementations, yet the control is wider in scope.

mitigates

Secure-authentication requirements include robust forgotten-password procedures.

none

Proper access-rights provisioning can limit who can trigger recovery, but does not fix the recovery mechanism itself.

References