CVE-2023-7048VulnerabilityPublished 11 Jan 2024Updated 3 Jun 2025

CVE-2023-7048: Floating Notification Bar, Sticky Menu on Scroll, Announcement Banner, and Sticky Header for Any Theme – My Sticky Bar (formerly myStickymenu) · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Affects Floating Notification Bar, Sticky Menu on Scroll, Announcement Banner, and Sticky Header for Any Theme – My Sticky Bar (formerly myStickymenu)Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.1 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.1Low

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 11% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 11 Jan 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
galdub Floating Notification Bar, Sticky Menu on Scroll, Announcement Banner, and Sticky Header for Any Theme – My Sticky Bar (formerly myStickymenu)	Affected *	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately verify if their WordPress installations use the My Sticky Bar plugin and identify the version in use. Until an official patch is released, administrators should consider disabling the plugin or restricting administrative access to trusted networks to reduce exposure. Implementing Web Application Firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block suspicious requests targeting the mystickymenu-contact-leads.php endpoint can help mitigate exploitation attempts. Additionally, educating administrators about the risks of clicking untrusted links and employing multi-factor authentication (MFA) for WordPress admin accounts can reduce the likelihood of successful social engineering. Monitoring web server logs for unusual export requests and ensuring that exported CSV files are not publicly accessible or are protected by authentication controls will further limit data exposure. Once a patch is available, organizations must prioritize updating the plugin to a secure version with proper nonce validation.

Description

The My Sticky Bar plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.6.6. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation in mystickymenu-contact-leads.php. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to trigger the export of a CSV file containing contact leads via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. Because the CSV file is exported to a public location, it can be downloaded during a very short window of time before it is automatically deleted by the export function.

Impact

For European organizations using WordPress websites with the My Sticky Bar plugin, this vulnerability could lead to unauthorized disclosure of contact lead information, which may include personal data protected under GDPR. Although the exposure window is short and the attack requires tricking an administrator, the leakage of contact leads can result in privacy violations, reputational damage, and potential regulatory penalties. The impact is primarily on confidentiality, with no direct effect on data integrity or availability. Organizations that rely on this plugin for marketing or customer engagement may face risks of data leakage to unauthorized parties, which could be exploited for phishing or social engineering attacks. The low CVSS score reflects the limited scope and complexity, but the sensitivity of contact lead data in European jurisdictions elevates the importance of addressing this vulnerability promptly.

CWE-352Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Compound weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #3OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
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.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation
Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
Architecture and Design
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).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
Insecure Direct Object Reference Prevention (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking) (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Domain Search Timing (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Identification (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Jul 2025, 15:27 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-352

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats