UserfeedbackWordPress extension · Monsterinsights
CVE-2023-46153
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 · uneditedUnauth. Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in UserFeedback Team User Feedback plugin <= 1.0.9 versions.
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 confidenceUnauthenticated stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the UserFeedback Team User Feedback WordPress plugin versions 1.0.9 and earlier. An attacker can inject malicious JavaScript payloads through user-submitted feedback forms that are stored and executed when administrators view the feedback data.
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
UserfeedbackWordPress extension
<= 1.0.9CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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.
-
Confirm UserFeedback plugin is installedAccess WordPress admin dashboard, go to Plugins section, and look for 'Monsterinsights Userfeedback' or 'UserFeedback' plugin. Alternatively, check the wp-content/plugins directory for a folder containing 'userfeedback' in the name.Affected if The plugin is present in the WordPress installation regardless of activation status
-
Check installed plugin versionIn WordPress admin > Plugins > click on the UserFeedback plugin to view its details, or open the main plugin PHP file (usually userfeedback.php) and check the version header in the plugin comments.Affected if Version displayed is 1.0.9 or lower (including any version like 1.0.8, 1.0.7, 1.0.6, etc.)
-
Verify feedback form is publicly accessibleVisit the website frontend where the feedback form is embedded. Since this is an unauthenticated vulnerability, the form should be accessible to anonymous visitors without requiring login.Affected if The feedback submission form is live and visible on any public page of the website
-
Inspect stored feedback for malicious contentIn WordPress admin, navigate to UserFeedback > Feedback (or similar menu item). Review any submitted feedback entries, checking the feedback content fields for suspicious patterns like <script> tags, javascript: URLs, onload events, or encoded payloads.Affected if Any feedback entries contain JavaScript code, HTML tags, or suspicious characters that suggest XSS injection attempts
User is affected if the UserFeedback plugin is installed with version 1.0.9 or lower and the feedback form is publicly accessible, regardless of whether malicious feedback has already been stored.
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 UserFeedback plugin to version 1.0.10 or later which contains the patched code with proper input sanitization and output encoding.
Fix this in Userfeedback
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-46153 — 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-2023-46153 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