LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2020-36761: Top 10 <= 2.9.4 - Cross-Site Request Forgery Bypass

The Top 10 plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 2.10.4. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the tptn_export_tables() function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to generate an export of the top 10 table via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.

MediumCVSS 4.3Not KEV-listedUpdated
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysismoderate

Security readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

This is a medium-severity CSRF issue in the WordPress Top 10 plugin. An attacker would need to trick an administrator into taking an action, such as clicking a link. The reported impact is limited: a forged request could generate an export of the Top 10 table, not take over the site.

Executive priority

Treat as a normal-priority WordPress plugin hygiene issue unless the plugin is deployed on sensitive or high-visibility sites. It requires admin interaction and has limited reported impact, but should still be remediated through routine patching.

Technical view

CVE-2020-36761 is CWE-352 caused by missing or incorrect nonce validation in tptn_export_tables(). The CVE description says Top 10 is affected through 2.10.4, while the title says through 2.9.4, so version evidence should be verified against vendor data.

Likely exposure

Exposure is likely limited to WordPress sites running the Top 10 / WebberZone Top 10 Popular Posts plugin in the affected version range. Successful abuse requires administrator interaction.

Exploitation context

The bundle does not identify CISA KEV listing or active exploitation. The attack model is social engineering plus a forged request from an unauthenticated attacker. No source in the bundle supports claims of automated or in-the-wild exploitation.

Researcher notes

Focus validation on nonce handling around tptn_export_tables() and version reconciliation. The supplied metadata conflicts on affected upper bound: title states 2.9.4, description states 2.10.4. Avoid assuming broader impact without vendor confirmation.

Mitigation direction

  • Inventory WordPress sites using the Top 10 plugin.
  • Verify installed versions against Wordfence and vendor plugin guidance.
  • Update beyond affected versions where a fixed release is available.
  • Limit administrator browsing while authenticated to trusted links and sites.
  • Review WordPress administrator accounts for least-privilege access.

Validation and detection

  • Check whether Top 10 is installed on any WordPress site.
  • Record the exact plugin version from WordPress administration or asset inventory.
  • Confirm whether the version is within the affected range stated by sources.
  • Review access logs for suspicious administrator-triggered export activity.
  • Verify current plugin code includes proper nonce validation for export actions.
Prepared
Confidence
medium
Sources
5

Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

cwe · medium confidence lookup

CWE-352: User-session and phishing behavior lookup

Client-side and session-facing weaknesses should be reviewed alongside initial-access and user-execution behaviors. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2020-36761 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profileCVE Program record
Severity
Medium
CVSS
4.3 (3.1)
Known Exploited
No
Published

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

Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

1CVSS vectors
0Timeline events
0ADP providers
10Source links

CVSS vector scores

1 official score

We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.

ScoreVersionSeverityVectorExploitImpactSource
4.3CVSS 3.1MediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N2.81.4Primary CVE score

Vulnerability scoring details

Base CVSS 3.1 score

4.3Medium
CVSS 3.1 vector shape for CVE-2020-36761Attack VectorAttack ComplexityPrivileges RequiredUser InteractionScopeConfidentiality ImpactIntegrity ImpactAvailability Impact

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

Attack Vector
NetworkAdjacentLocalPhysical
Attack Complexity
LowHigh
Privileges Required
NoneLowHigh
User Interaction
NoneRequired
Scope
ChangedUnchanged
Confidentiality Impact
HighLowNone
Integrity Impact
HighLowNone
Availability Impact
HighLowNone
Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
ajayWebberZone Top 10 — Popular Posts0unaffected
Weakness

CWE details

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.

CWE-352 · source CWE mapping

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.