WordPressCMS
CVE-2007-2627
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in sidebar.php in WordPress, when custom 404 pages that call get_sidebar are used, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the query string (PHP_SELF), a different vulnerability than CVE-2007-1622.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceXSS vulnerability in WordPress sidebar.php where the PHP_SELF variable is not properly sanitized when custom 404 pages call get_sidebar, allowing injection of arbitrary script/HTML via the query string.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
WordPressCMS
all versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate sidebar.php in the active themeFind the sidebar.php file in the currently active WordPress theme directory (wp-content/themes/[theme-name]/sidebar.php)Affected if The file exists and contains PHP_SELF variable usage
-
Check if PHP_SELF is used without sanitization in sidebar.phpOpen sidebar.php and search for occurrences of $_SERVER['PHP_SELF'] or PHP_SELF. Verify if it is wrapped with htmlspecialchars(), esc_attr(), or other sanitization functions before outputAffected if $_SERVER['PHP_SELF'] is present and NOT sanitized before being output to the page
-
Identify if a custom 404 template exists and uses get_sidebarCheck the active theme for a 404.php file. If present, examine whether it calls get_sidebar() functionAffected if A custom 404.php exists and calls get_sidebar(), passing user-controlled query string data to the sidebar
-
Verify query string reflection in the themeTest the site with a non-existent page URL containing a query string (e.g., example.com/?test=<script>alert(1)</script>). Examine the page source to see if the query string is reflected without encodingAffected if The query string parameters appear in the HTML output without proper HTML encoding (e.g., < becomes <)
The environment is affected if the active theme's sidebar.php contains unsanitized $_SERVER['PHP_SELF'] and the theme uses custom 404 pages that call get_sidebar(), allowing XSS via query string parameters.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpdate WordPress to a patched version that sanitizes the PHP_SELF variable in sidebar.php, or manually apply input validation/sanitization to the query string handling in custom 404 page implementations.
Fix this in WordPress
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-2627 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2007-2627 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data