CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
CRITICALpublic exploit

CVE-2025-5947

CVE-2025-5947 — Service Finder Bookings <= 6.0 - Authentication Bypass via User Switch Cookie

The Service Finder Bookings plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to privilege escalation via authentication bypass in all versions up to, and including, 6.0. This is due to the plugin not properly validating a user's cookie value prior to logging them in through the service_finder_switch_back() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to login as any user including admins.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, Wordfence

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

4%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

aonetheme

service_finder_bookings

CVSS base

9.8

CRITICAL

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

aonetheme

Products (1)

service finder bookings

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
9.8CVSS 3.1CRITICAL——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-639

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Indexed by

poc in github

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.