dbcve.org
CWE-93Weakness · CWE-93

CVE-2026-12127

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-07-01
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click 8 weeks old

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 · unedited
The WPForms – Easy Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Surveys, & More plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection') in all versions up to, and including, 1.10.2 This is due to `get_reply_to_address()` processing the Reply-To display name through smart-tag expansion with context `'notification'` instead of `'notification-reply-to'`, which bypasses email-address validation while `wpforms_sanitize_textarea_field()` intentionally preserves CR/LF characters that are never stripped before the display name is concatenated into the raw `Reply-To:` mail header string. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary additional email headers — such as `Bcc:` — into outgoing notification emails, silently blind-copying all notification email copies to an attacker-controlled address. Exploitation requires that a form notification is configured to use a Paragraph Text (textarea) field as the Reply-To display name via a Smart Tag.

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 confidence

The WPForms plugin <= 1.10.2 contains a CRLF Injection vulnerability in the `get_reply_to_address()` function. The function processes Reply-To display names using smart-tag expansion with incorrect context ('notification' vs 'notification-reply-to'), bypassing validation. Combined with `wpforms_sanitize_textarea_field()` preserving CR/LF characters, attackers can inject arbitrary email headers like Bcc: into notification emails by crafting malicious display names containing CRLF sequences.

MitigationUpgrade WPForms to version 1.10.3 or later. Until then, avoid using Paragraph Text fields as Reply-To display names via Smart Tags in form notifications.

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
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check installed WPForms version
    Navigate to Plugins > Installed Plugins in WordPress admin, locate WPForms, and note the version number displayed. Alternatively, check the plugin header in wpforms/wpforms.php for the 'Version' constant.
    Affected if Version is 1.10.2 or lower (the vulnerable version range)
  2. Identify forms with notifications enabled
    Go to WPForms > Forms, select each form, and navigate to Settings > Notifications. Verify if notifications are active (toggle is on).
    Affected if Any form has notifications enabled and uses the Reply-To feature
  3. Inspect Reply-To display name configuration
    In the notification settings, locate the 'Reply-To' field (often labeled 'Reply-To name' or similar). Examine whether a Smart Tag is used in this field, particularly one referencing a form field like {field name="xx"} or a Paragraph Text field.
    Affected if A Smart Tag is used in the Reply-To display name field, especially one referencing a Paragraph Text or text input field
  4. Verify smart tag context expansion
    The vulnerability stems from the get_reply_to_address() function processing smart tags with the wrong context ('notification' instead of 'notification-reply-to'). If your Reply-To uses a smart tag pointing to a user-editable field, the sanitization can be bypassed.
    Affected if The Reply-To display name field uses a smart tag that pulls from a form field users can edit

You are affected if WPForms version is 1.10.2 or lower AND you have form notifications configured with a Smart Tag in the Reply-To display name field, allowing CRLF injection in the email header.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade WPForms to version 1.10.3 or later. Until then, avoid using Paragraph Text fields as Reply-To display names via Smart Tags in form notifications.

Recommended fix High confidence

WPForms plugin version 1.10.3 or later

  1. 1. Navigate to the WordPress admin dashboard
  2. 2. Go to Plugins > Installed Plugins
  3. 3. Locate the WPForms plugin
  4. 4. If an update is available, click 'Update Now' to update to the latest version (1.10.3 or later)
  5. 5. Alternatively, download the latest version from wordpress.org/plugins/wpforms-lite/ and upload via Plugins > Add New > Upload Plugin
  6. 6. Verify the updated version is installed and active

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
8.0 hours of engineering $1,420
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-12127 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-12127 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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