CVE-2024-54440
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 Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in blueskyy WP-Ban-User wp-ban-user allows Stored XSS.This issue affects WP-Ban-User: from n/a through <= 1.0.
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 · moderate confidenceCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the WP-Ban-User WordPress plugin allows attackers to trick authenticated administrators into submitting malicious requests that inject Stored XSS payloads into ban rules or related functionality.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Verify WP-Ban-User plugin is installed and activeNavigate to WordPress admin > Plugins and locate WP-Ban-User in the installed plugins list. Confirm the plugin shows as 'Active'.Affected if Plugin is installed and active with an unpatched version
-
Identify installed plugin versionClick on the plugin in the Plugins list to view its details, or inspect the plugin header in wp-content/plugins/wp-ban-user/plugin.php to read the Version field.Affected if Installed version falls below the patched version (compare against vendor release notes)
-
Inspect database for suspicious ban rule entriesQuery the wp_options table (or custom ban table if used) for entries containing the 'ban' or 'wp_banuser' option_name. Examine option_value for encoded scripts, HTML tags with event handlers (onload, onerror, onclick), or base64-encoded payloads.Affected if Any ban rule contains unsanitized user-supplied content that could execute as JavaScript
-
Review ban rule forms for CSRF protectionInspect the plugin PHP source code for state-changing forms (add/edit/delete ban rules). Search for 'wp_nonce_field', 'wp_verify_nonce', or 'nonce' in form handling logic.Affected if Forms lack nonce verification tokens or nonces are not validated before processing ban rule changes
Environment is affected if the WP-Ban-User plugin is active, runs an unpatched version, or already contains malicious stored XSS payloads in ban rule configurations.
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 dataAdd CSRF token verification (nonces) to all state-changing forms and actions in the plugin, combined with proper input sanitization and output encoding to prevent stored XSS execution.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-54440 — 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-2024-54440 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