GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

FKIE_CVE-2026-19858

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-09-05 07:17 - Updated: 2026-09-08 19:09
Severity
7.5 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Summary
The JetFormBuilder — Dynamic Blocks Form Builder WordPress plugin before 3.6.5.2 does not perform authorisation checks when resolving request-derived data during page rendering, allowing unauthenticated users to read arbitrary user, post and term properties and metadata, including password hashes, private and draft content, and secrets other JetFormBuilder — Dynamic Blocks Form Builder WordPress plugin before 3.6.5.2 store in metadata.
References
contact@wpscan.comhttps://wpscan.com/vulnerability/a9d091f3-6887-4f26-a736-ba26a81d2b32/
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "JetFormBuilder \u2014 Dynamic Blocks Form Builder",
          "vendor": "Unknown",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "3.6.5.2",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "contact@wpscan.com"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "The JetFormBuilder \u2014 Dynamic Blocks Form Builder WordPress plugin before 3.6.5.2 does not perform authorisation checks when resolving request-derived data during page rendering, allowing unauthenticated users to read arbitrary user, post and term properties and metadata, including password hashes, private and draft content, and secrets other JetFormBuilder \u2014 Dynamic Blocks Form Builder WordPress plugin before 3.6.5.2 store in metadata."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-19858",
  "lastModified": "2026-09-08T19:09:21.310",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 7.5,
          "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
        "impactScore": 3.6,
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-19858",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "yes"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-09-06T10:34:05.333179Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-09-05T07:17:11.467",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "contact@wpscan.com",
      "url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/a9d091f3-6887-4f26-a736-ba26a81d2b32/"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "contact@wpscan.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-200"
        }
      ],
      "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





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.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.