GHSA-PH8G-MCQH-5P98

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-16 06:30 – Updated: 2026-10-16 06:30
VLAI
Details

The PilotPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Privilege Escalation via Account Takeover in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.43. The vulnerability exists because the update_cc_details() AJAX handler forwards an attacker-supplied username parameter to ONTRAPORT via api_call('update_cc_details', ...) before performing the local username_exists() collision check, and aborts without rolling back the remote rename when a collision is detected — leaving the remote ONTRAPORT contact renamed to an existing WordPress Administrator's login. On a subsequent login attempt, user_login() (hooked to wp_authenticate) authenticates against ONTRAPORT using the renamed login and the attacker's own password, resolves the local WordPress user row via get_user_by('login', $username) — which now selects the real Administrator's row — and calls wp_set_password() against that Administrator's user ID; because the user_level != 10 guard only suppresses PilotPress's own cookie issuance rather than returning a WP_Error to core, WordPress proceeds to validate the newly-synchronized password and issues a full Administrator authentication cookie to the attacker. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers with Subscriber-level access and above — specifically any PilotPress member holding a valid ONTRAPORT contact and the Customer Center nonce — to fully take over an Administrator account.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-85659"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-269"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-10-16T06:17:11Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "The PilotPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Privilege Escalation via Account Takeover in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.43. The vulnerability exists because the `update_cc_details()` AJAX handler forwards an attacker-supplied `username` parameter to ONTRAPORT via `api_call(\u0027update_cc_details\u0027, ...)` before performing the local `username_exists()` collision check, and aborts without rolling back the remote rename when a collision is detected \u2014 leaving the remote ONTRAPORT contact renamed to an existing WordPress Administrator\u0027s login. On a subsequent login attempt, `user_login()` (hooked to `wp_authenticate`) authenticates against ONTRAPORT using the renamed login and the attacker\u0027s own password, resolves the local WordPress user row via `get_user_by(\u0027login\u0027, $username)` \u2014 which now selects the real Administrator\u0027s row \u2014 and calls `wp_set_password()` against that Administrator\u0027s user ID; because the `user_level != 10` guard only suppresses PilotPress\u0027s own cookie issuance rather than returning a `WP_Error` to core, WordPress proceeds to validate the newly-synchronized password and issues a full Administrator authentication cookie to the attacker. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers with Subscriber-level access and above \u2014 specifically any PilotPress member holding a valid ONTRAPORT contact and the Customer Center nonce \u2014 to fully take over an Administrator account.",
  "id": "GHSA-ph8g-mcqh-5p98",
  "modified": "2026-10-16T06:30:28Z",
  "published": "2026-10-16T06:30:28Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-85659"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/pilotpress/tags/2.0.39/pilotpress.php?rev=3642310#L1029"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/pilotpress/tags/2.0.39/pilotpress.php?rev=3642310#L1099"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/pilotpress/tags/2.0.39/pilotpress.php?rev=3642310#L1690"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/pilotpress/tags/2.0.39/pilotpress.php?rev=3642310#L2380"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3737004"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/ceee48dd-72a7-49c3-90d5-7af1a30f9ecb?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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
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.