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

FKIE_CVE-2026-8441

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-07-02 10:16 - Updated: 2026-07-02 13:58
Summary
The WP Review Slider Pro plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'notinstring' parameter of the wprp_load_more_revs AJAX action in versions up to, and including, 12.7.2. The parameter is read via $_POST['notinstring'] and passed through sanitize_text_field() — which strips HTML and whitespace but does not provide SQL safety. The value is then concatenated directly into a numeric/unquoted `AND id NOT IN (...)` clause and executed via $wpdb->get_results() without $wpdb->prepare() or intval() casting. Because the value sits in an unquoted numeric context, WordPress's wp_magic_quotes protection (which only escapes embedded quotes) is ineffective. The AJAX hook is registered via wp_ajax_nopriv_wprp_load_more_revs, and the required check_ajax_referer nonce is publicly available via wp_localize_script on any frontend page that renders the plugin shortcode, so an unauthenticated attacker who can reach a public page hosting the plugin can extract arbitrary data from the database via blind/time-based injection.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "WP Review Slider Pro",
          "vendor": "https://wpreviewslider.com/",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "12.7.2",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@wordfence.com"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "The WP Review Slider Pro plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the \u0027notinstring\u0027 parameter of the wprp_load_more_revs AJAX action in versions up to, and including, 12.7.2. The parameter is read via $_POST[\u0027notinstring\u0027] and passed through sanitize_text_field() \u2014 which strips HTML and whitespace but does not provide SQL safety. The value is then concatenated directly into a numeric/unquoted `AND id NOT IN (...)` clause and executed via $wpdb-\u003eget_results() without $wpdb-\u003eprepare() or intval() casting. Because the value sits in an unquoted numeric context, WordPress\u0027s wp_magic_quotes protection (which only escapes embedded quotes) is ineffective. The AJAX hook is registered via wp_ajax_nopriv_wprp_load_more_revs, and the required check_ajax_referer nonce is publicly available via wp_localize_script on any frontend page that renders the plugin shortcode, so an unauthenticated attacker who can reach a public page hosting the plugin can extract arbitrary data from the database via blind/time-based injection."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-8441",
  "lastModified": "2026-07-02T13:58:56.870",
  "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": "security@wordfence.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-8441",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "yes"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-07-02T12:36:37.994665Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-07-02T10:16:28.617",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://wpreviewslider.userecho.com/knowledge-bases/2/articles/88-change-log"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/396ba24f-e0f7-4374-a9ce-d9abddb87b39?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@wordfence.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-89"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

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.


Loading…