VulnerabilityPublished 12 Mar 2026

CVE-2025-15473: Timetics (WordPress plugin) · Missing Authorization

Affects Timetics (WordPress plugin)Source CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 1.0.52 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 6% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.0.52

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 12 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 29 Oct 2026.

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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity 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

Upgrade Timetics (WordPress plugin) to 1.0.52.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Timetics	Affected <1.0.52	Fixed in 1.0.52

AI-suggested

To mitigate this vulnerability, organizations should promptly update the Timetics plugin to version 1.0.52 or later once it becomes available, as this version is expected to include proper authorization checks on the REST endpoint. If you cannot patch yet, administrators should consider restricting access to the REST API endpoints related to Timetics using web application firewalls (WAFs) or server-level access controls to limit exposure to unauthenticated users. Additionally, monitoring REST API logs for unusual or unauthorized requests targeting booking status changes can help detect exploitation attempts. Implementing least privilege principles for WordPress users and regularly auditing plugin permissions can reduce risk. Organizations should also maintain regular backups of booking data to enable recovery from unauthorized modifications. Finally, staying informed through official Timetics and WordPress security advisories is critical to timely response.

Description

The Timetics WordPress plugin before 1.0.52 does not have authorization in a REST endpoint, allowing unauthenticated users to arbitrarily change a booking's payment status and post status for the "timetics-booking" custom post type.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-15473 is on data integrity within affected Timetics plugin installations. Unauthorized users can alter booking payment statuses and post statuses, potentially leading to fraudulent transactions, incorrect booking confirmations, or cancellations. This can result in financial losses, reputational damage, and operational disruptions for organizations relying on Timetics for managing bookings or appointments. While confidentiality and availability are not directly impacted, the integrity compromise may indirectly affect customer trust and business processes. Since exploitation requires no authentication and can be performed remotely, the attack surface is broad, especially for publicly accessible WordPress sites using vulnerable Timetics versions. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but does not preclude future attacks. Organizations with high volumes of bookings or financial transactions are at greater risk of significant impact.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

wpscan.com/vulnerability/f355e4ac-7aa6-4c5b-b1e5-b37937156583/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 12 Mar 2026, 14:29 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats