CVE-2025-8085VulnerabilityPublished 8 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-8085: Ditty (WordPress plugin) · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects Ditty (WordPress plugin)Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · public detection template (Nuclei) · 20% EPSS · CVSS 8.6 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.6High

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

EPSS: 20.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 97% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
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: 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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 8 Sep 2025
Detectable: evidence found.
nuclei template: Ditty < 3.1.58 - Server-Side Request Forgery
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 2026-10-25.

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
Ditty	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Immediate mitigation should include restricting access to the displayItems endpoint via web application firewalls (WAFs) or reverse proxies by allowing only trusted IP addresses or authenticated users to access it. 2. Monitor web server logs for unusual requests to the displayItems endpoint, especially those containing unexpected or internal URLs. 3. Disable or remove the Ditty plugin if it is not essential until a patched version is released. 4. If possible, implement network-level controls to prevent the web server from making outbound HTTP requests to internal or sensitive IP ranges, effectively limiting SSRF impact. 5. Keep WordPress core and all plugins updated; monitor the Ditty plugin vendor’s announcements for patches addressing this vulnerability. 6. Conduct internal scans to identify all WordPress instances using the Ditty plugin to prioritize remediation. 7. Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect anomalous outbound requests from web servers. 8. Educate security teams about SSRF risks and ensure incident response plans include SSRF scenarios.

Description

The Ditty WordPress plugin before 3.1.58 lacks authorization and authentication for requests to its displayItems endpoint, allowing unauthenticated visitors to make requests to arbitrary URLs.

Impact

For European organizations, this SSRF vulnerability in the Ditty WordPress plugin poses several risks. Exploitation could allow attackers to perform internal network scanning and access internal services that are not exposed externally, potentially leading to further compromise. Confidential data residing on internal systems or cloud metadata services could be exposed. Additionally, attackers might leverage SSRF to bypass firewalls or access restricted resources, which could facilitate lateral movement within an organization's network. Since WordPress is widely adopted by businesses, government agencies, and other institutions across Europe, any entity using the vulnerable Ditty plugin is at risk. This could lead to data breaches, service disruptions, or reputational damage. The unauthenticated nature of the vulnerability means that attackers do not need valid credentials, increasing the likelihood of exploitation. Although no known exploits are reported yet, the ease of exploitation and the common use of WordPress plugins make this a significant threat. Organizations with sensitive internal services accessible only internally are particularly at risk, as SSRF can be used to pivot into these systems. The impact on availability is generally lower unless SSRF is chained with other vulnerabilities, but confidentiality and integrity risks are substantial.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

wpscan.com/vulnerability/f42c37bb-1ae0-49ab-bd81-7864dff0fcff/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Sep 2025, 06:23 UTC

Public exploits and detectiona Nuclei detection template

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats