FKIE_CVE-2026-118267

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-11-07 12:17 - Updated: 2026-11-07 19:17
Severity
8.1 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Summary
The WP Data Access – App Builder for Tables, Forms, Dashboards, Charts & Maps plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Incorrect Authorization leading to Privilege Escalation in all versions up to, and including, 5.5.89 This is due to the plugin's write endpoints (`wpda/app/update`, `wpda/app/delete`, `wpda/app/insert`) passing the attacker-supplied `key` and `val` parameters directly to `$wpdadb->update`, `$wpdadb->delete`, and `$wpdadb->insert` without enforcing the container's row-filter (`defaultWhere`) or per-column allow-list (`isSelected`) restrictions that are correctly applied on the read endpoints. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to write to arbitrary rows and columns outside the configured restrictions — including overwriting the `user_pass` field of the WordPress administrator account in `wp_users` — and subsequently authenticate as the administrator, achieving full site takeover. Exploitation requires an administrator to have published a Data App that enables write transactions (update, delete, or insert) for Subscriber-level or anonymous users, which is an explicitly advertised use-case of the plugin. Exploitation by unauthenticated attackers requires that the administrator has published a Data App whose rest_api.authorization is 'anonymous' and whose container has transactions.update (or delete/insert) enabled. On a default installation, where that is not configured, the vulnerability requires attackers with subscriber-level access and above.
References
security@wordfence.comhttps://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L1186
security@wordfence.comhttps://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L1213
security@wordfence.comhttps://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L1267
security@wordfence.comhttps://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L382
security@wordfence.comhttps://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Table.php#L665
security@wordfence.comhttps://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?reponame=&new=3771310%40wp-data-access%2Ftags%2F5.5.90&old=3761178%40wp-data-access%2Ftags%2F5.5.89
security@wordfence.comhttps://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/a81029fe-db29-4dd4-8450-65d1764855f1?source=cve
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "WP Data Access \u2013 App Builder for Tables, Forms, Dashboards, Charts \u0026 Maps",
          "vendor": "peterschulznl",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "5.5.89",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@wordfence.com"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "The WP Data Access \u2013 App Builder for Tables, Forms, Dashboards, Charts \u0026 Maps plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Incorrect Authorization leading to Privilege Escalation in all versions up to, and including, 5.5.89 This is due to the plugin\u0027s write endpoints (`wpda/app/update`, `wpda/app/delete`, `wpda/app/insert`) passing the attacker-supplied `key` and `val` parameters directly to `$wpdadb-\u003eupdate`, `$wpdadb-\u003edelete`, and `$wpdadb-\u003einsert` without enforcing the container\u0027s row-filter (`defaultWhere`) or per-column allow-list (`isSelected`) restrictions that are correctly applied on the read endpoints. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to write to arbitrary rows and columns outside the configured restrictions \u2014 including overwriting the `user_pass` field of the WordPress administrator account in `wp_users` \u2014 and subsequently authenticate as the administrator, achieving full site takeover. Exploitation requires an administrator to have published a Data App that enables write transactions (update, delete, or insert) for Subscriber-level or anonymous users, which is an explicitly advertised use-case of the plugin. Exploitation by unauthenticated attackers requires that the administrator has published a Data App whose rest_api.authorization is \u0027anonymous\u0027 and whose container has transactions.update (or delete/insert) enabled. On a default installation, where that is not configured, the vulnerability requires attackers with subscriber-level access and above."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-118267",
  "lastModified": "2026-11-07T19:17:18.410",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "baseScore": 8.1,
          "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 2.2,
        "impactScore": 5.9,
        "source": "security@wordfence.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-118267",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "total"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-11-07T18:11:38.819789Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-11-07T12:17:43.867",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L1186"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L1213"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L1267"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Apps.php#L382"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-data-access/tags/5.5.89/WPDataAccess/API/WPDA_Table.php#L665"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?reponame=\u0026new=3771310%40wp-data-access%2Ftags%2F5.5.90\u0026old=3761178%40wp-data-access%2Ftags%2F5.5.89"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/a81029fe-db29-4dd4-8450-65d1764855f1?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@wordfence.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-863"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.