GHSA-CCR8-XM74-43HP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-09 06:31 – Updated: 2026-06-09 06:31
VLAI
Details

The jQuery Hover Footnotes plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.4. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the jqFootnotes_options_subpanel function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's settings with arbitrary values that, because option values such as jqfoot_anchor_open, jqfoot_anchor_close, and jqfoot_title are echoed unescaped into frontend page content, can be chained into persistent Cross-Site Scripting affecting all site visitors via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. Successful exploitation of the CSRF vulnerability can be chained into stored Cross-Site Scripting, as the overwritten option values are persisted via update_option() without sanitization and rendered unescaped on the frontend.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-10553"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-09T05:16:29Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The jQuery Hover Footnotes plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.4. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the jqFootnotes_options_subpanel function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin\u0027s settings with arbitrary values that, because option values such as jqfoot_anchor_open, jqfoot_anchor_close, and jqfoot_title are echoed unescaped into frontend page content, can be chained into persistent Cross-Site Scripting affecting all site visitors via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. Successful exploitation of the CSRF vulnerability can be chained into stored Cross-Site Scripting, as the overwritten option values are persisted via update_option() without sanitization and rendered unescaped on the frontend.",
  "id": "GHSA-ccr8-xm74-43hp",
  "modified": "2026-06-09T06:31:56Z",
  "published": "2026-06-09T06:31:56Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-10553"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/jquery-hover-footnotes/trunk/jqFootnotes.php#L159"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/jquery-hover-footnotes/trunk/jqFootnotes.php#L56"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/jquery-hover-footnotes/trunk/jqFootnotes.php#L57"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/c174887b-e24d-4100-97da-8e0923ebafe5?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


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…