[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$fod94lAXd5bHZxo3kzLQrR_OgiDRDvxGSIeNnCsDBIKc":3},{"slug":4,"name":5,"version":6,"author":7,"author_profile":8,"description":9,"short_description":10,"active_installs":11,"downloaded":12,"rating":13,"num_ratings":14,"last_updated":15,"tested_up_to":16,"requires_at_least":17,"requires_php":18,"tags":19,"homepage":18,"download_link":21,"security_score":22,"vuln_count":23,"unpatched_count":23,"last_vuln_date":24,"fetched_at":25,"vulnerabilities":26,"developer":27,"crawl_stats":24,"alternatives":34,"analysis":35,"fingerprints":65},"get-terms-name-like","Get terms name__like","0.1","keesiemeijer","https:\u002F\u002Fprofiles.wordpress.org\u002Fkeesiemeijer\u002F","\u003Cp>The “name_like” parameter was changed in WordPress \u003Cstrong>3.7\u003C\u002Fstrong> to match terms that \u003Cstrong>contain\u003C\u002Fstrong> the “name__like” string. Use this plugin or use the function from the plugin file in your own (child) theme if you want it to only match terms that \u003Cstrong>begin\u003C\u002Fstrong> with the “name__like” string as it was prior to 3.7.\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>This reverses the changes made in this trac ticket.\u003Cbr \u002F>\nhttps:\u002F\u002Fcore.trac.wordpress.org\u002Fticket\u002F8214\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>The “search” parameter does almost exactly what the “name__like” parameter does now (in 3.7), the difference being it also searches in term slugs. Use both parameters (as it was before 3.7) to get the terms you want.\u003Cbr \u002F>\nSee: https:\u002F\u002Fcodex.wordpress.org\u002FFunction_Reference\u002Fget_terms#Parameters\u003C\u002Fp>\n\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>Note\u003C\u002Fstrong>: this plugin only reverses it on the front end of your website for WordPress versions 3.7 and up.\u003C\u002Fp>\n","Get the terms by name that begin with the \"name__like\" parameter used by the WordPress function get_terms().",10,1655,100,1,"2013-11-09T11:18:00.000Z","3.7.41","3.7","",[20],"name__like","https:\u002F\u002Fdownloads.wordpress.org\u002Fplugin\u002Fget-terms-name-like.zip",85,0,null,"2026-03-15T14:54:45.397Z",[],{"slug":7,"display_name":7,"profile_url":8,"plugin_count":28,"total_installs":29,"avg_security_score":30,"avg_patch_time_days":31,"trust_score":32,"computed_at":33},6,11200,89,8,86,"2026-04-04T13:58:59.246Z",[],{"attackSurface":36,"codeSignals":48,"taintFlows":55,"riskAssessment":56,"analyzedAt":64},{"hooks":37,"ajaxHandlers":44,"restRoutes":45,"shortcodes":46,"cronEvents":47,"entryPointCount":23,"unprotectedCount":23},[38],{"type":39,"name":40,"callback":41,"priority":11,"file":42,"line":43},"filter","terms_clauses","gtnl_get_terms_name__like","get-terms-name-like.php",23,[],[],[],[],{"dangerousFunctions":49,"sqlUsage":50,"outputEscaping":52,"fileOperations":23,"externalRequests":23,"nonceChecks":23,"capabilityChecks":23,"bundledLibraries":54},[],{"prepared":23,"raw":23,"locations":51},[],{"escaped":23,"rawEcho":23,"locations":53},[],[],[],{"summary":57,"deductions":58},"The \"get-terms-name-like\" plugin v0.1 exhibits a strong security posture based on the provided static analysis. The complete absence of any identified entry points, dangerous functions, SQL queries, file operations, or external HTTP requests is a significant strength. Furthermore, the reporting of 100% prepared statements for SQL and 100% properly escaped output indicates good development practices in these critical areas. The lack of any recorded vulnerabilities, past or present, further reinforces this positive assessment.\n\nHowever, the most notable concern arises from the complete absence of security checks, including nonce checks and capability checks. While the current code analysis shows no immediate entry points to exploit, this lack of foundational security mechanisms represents a significant potential risk. If any functionality were to be added or discovered later, it would likely be unprotected by default. The plugin's minimal functionality and zero attack surface in its current state mask this underlying weakness.\n\nIn conclusion, while \"get-terms-name-like\" v0.1 currently appears safe due to its limited scope and lack of exploitable code paths, its security is fragile. The absence of any authentication or authorization checks, even with a zero attack surface, is a critical oversight that could lead to severe vulnerabilities if the plugin evolves or is integrated into a more complex system. The excellent track record of zero vulnerabilities is encouraging but does not negate the inherent risk of undeveloped security controls.",[59,62],{"reason":60,"points":61},"Missing nonce checks",5,{"reason":63,"points":61},"Missing capability checks","2026-03-16T23:38:48.099Z",{"wat":66,"direct":71},{"assetPaths":67,"generatorPatterns":68,"scriptPaths":69,"versionParams":70},[],[],[],[],{"cssClasses":72,"htmlComments":73,"htmlAttributes":74,"restEndpoints":75,"jsGlobals":76,"shortcodeOutput":77},[],[],[],[],[],[]]