GHSA-7GVP-GCXQ-58G5

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-11-06 12:30 – Updated: 2026-11-06 12:30
VLAI
Details

The BuddyForms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Privilege Escalation in all versions up to, and including, 2.10.5 via a form-type confusion attack through the bf_post_type parameter. This is due to the public frontend submission handler buddyforms_form_response_no_ajax() authorizing logged-out submissions based solely on the target form's public_submit flag while independently trusting the attacker-supplied $_POST['bf_post_type'] to determine the post type of the newly created object — a cross-check introduced in 2.10.2 applies only to existing posts (post_id != 0) and is completely bypassed for new-object creation — combined with the save_post listener buddyforms_edit_form_save_meta_box_data() lacking both a current_user_can() capability check and a form-builder nonce, causing it to unconditionally persist attacker-supplied $_POST['buddyforms_options'] for any newly inserted buddyforms CPT post. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to insert a rogue BuddyForms form configuration with an attacker-controlled new_user_role value into the live global form registry, then submit a registration through that form to create a new WordPress account with administrator-level privileges and achieve full site takeover. Exploitation requires the WordPress site to have "Anyone can register" enabled and at least one public BuddyForms form attached to a page, both of which are standard BuddyForms deployment configurations.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-107622"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-269"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-11-06T12:17:16Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "The BuddyForms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Privilege Escalation in all versions up to, and including, 2.10.5 via a form-type confusion attack through the `bf_post_type` parameter. This is due to the public frontend submission handler `buddyforms_form_response_no_ajax()` authorizing logged-out submissions based solely on the target form\u0027s `public_submit` flag while independently trusting the attacker-supplied `$_POST[\u0027bf_post_type\u0027]` to determine the post type of the newly created object \u2014 a cross-check introduced in 2.10.2 applies only to existing posts (`post_id != 0`) and is completely bypassed for new-object creation \u2014 combined with the `save_post` listener `buddyforms_edit_form_save_meta_box_data()` lacking both a `current_user_can()` capability check and a form-builder nonce, causing it to unconditionally persist attacker-supplied `$_POST[\u0027buddyforms_options\u0027]` for any newly inserted `buddyforms` CPT post. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to insert a rogue BuddyForms form configuration with an attacker-controlled `new_user_role` value into the live global form registry, then submit a registration through that form to create a new WordPress account with administrator-level privileges and achieve full site takeover. Exploitation requires the WordPress site to have \"Anyone can register\" enabled and at least one public BuddyForms form attached to a page, both of which are standard BuddyForms deployment configurations.",
  "id": "GHSA-7gvp-gcxq-58g5",
  "modified": "2026-11-06T12:30:46Z",
  "published": "2026-11-06T12:30:46Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-107622"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Themekraft/buddyforms/pull/779/files"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/buddyforms/tags/2.10.2/includes/admin/register-post-types.php#L216"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/buddyforms/tags/2.10.2/includes/form/form-control.php#L258"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/buddyforms/tags/2.10.2/includes/form/form-control.php#L642"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/buddyforms/tags/2.10.2/includes/form/form.php#L476"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/buddyforms/tags/2.10.2/includes/wp-insert-user.php#L241"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/buddyforms/tags/2.10.2/includes/wp-insert-user.php#L702"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3780268/buddyforms/trunk/includes/admin/register-post-types.php"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/2e83e654-f8a6-44a6-a687-92606331309e?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.

Events included in the timeline

Loading timeline…


    Loading…

    Loading…

    Loading…

    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.