Retour à la veille

CVE-2026-15780

Publié : 19 août 2026
Modifié : 19 août 2026
Lien officiel NVD
Score CVSS
7.2
HIGH

Description détaillée

The WP Statistics – Simple, privacy-friendly Google Analytics alternative plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'utm_campaign' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 14.16.8 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. The payload can be planted without authentication via the public /wp-statistics/v2/hit REST endpoint, because the required signature is exposed on the public homepage and a base64-encoded page_uri POST parameter overrides the previously sanitized REQUEST_URI, allowing the malicious utm_campaign value to bypass sanitization and be stored in the database.

Vecteur d'attaque (CVSS)

Vecteur brut :CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Références et Patchs

https://github.com/wp-statistics/wp-statistics/commit/6ab74427778b89c9e88471e9dd7407d9055a9b34https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.7/assets/dev/javascript/helper.js#L267https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.7/includes/api/v2/class-wp-statistics-api-hit.php#L78https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.7/includes/class-wp-statistics-helper.php#L1462https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.7/includes/class-wp-statistics-hits.php#L102https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.7/views/components/tables/referred-visitors.php#L79https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.7/views/components/tables/visitors.php#L94https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.8/assets/dev/javascript/helper.js#L267https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.8/includes/api/v2/class-wp-statistics-api-hit.php#L78https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.8/includes/class-wp-statistics-helper.php#L1462https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.8/includes/class-wp-statistics-hits.php#L102https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.8/views/components/tables/referred-visitors.php#L79https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wp-statistics/tags/14.16.8/views/components/tables/visitors.php#L94https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/b5baecfe-ce0b-4cec-8462-bfd7eadd41e9?source=cve

Dernières Vulnérabilités

CVE-2026-75900

An out-of-bounds read vulnerability was found in swtpm's SWTPM_NVRAM_CheckHeader() function. The entry guard checks the buffer length against sizeof(bh), where bh is a pointer, instead of sizeof(*bh), the actual struct size. This allows an undersized buffer to pass validation, causing a 2-byte heap overread on 64-bit systems (6 bytes on 32-bit) when accessing the totlen field. This may cause daemon termination on some platforms and leaks heap data to the log.

VOIR DÉTAILS

CVE-2026-75589

Net::OAuth versions before 0.33 for Perl check HMAC-SHA1, HMAC-SHA256 and PLAINTEXT signatures with a non-constant-time comparison in verify. Each of the three compares the signature carried in the message against the locally computed one with the eq operator, which returns as soon as the two strings differ. The time taken to reject a signature varies with the length of the matching prefix. RSA-SHA1 is not affected, as it verifies through the RSA key object rather than by comparing strings. A client that can submit messages and time the replies may recover a valid signature one byte at a time rather than searching the whole signature space. Under PLAINTEXT the value compared against is the signature key itself, so the search recovers consumer_secret and token_secret.

VOIR DÉTAILS

CVE-2026-72889

Net::OAuth versions before 0.33 for Perl allow the sender to choose the signature algorithm in verify. verify resolves the signature method class from the signature_method parameter of the incoming message. signature_method is required on every request, so the algorithm used to check a signature is chosen by whoever sent it, and nothing lets the verifying party pin the method instead. When a message names HMAC-SHA1 or HMAC-SHA256, the key is derived from consumer_secret and token_secret rather than from the key the provider deployed. A provider deployed on RSA-SHA1 holds only the consumer public key, and RFC 5849 does not use consumer_secret for that method, so the required parameter is filled with a placeholder. A client that names HMAC-SHA1 instead has its signature checked against that placeholder, so a guessable one is enough to forge requests for any consumer key and token.

VOIR DÉTAILS