CVE-2026-14557
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 · uneditedThe SoftMarket — Digital Marketplace WordPress plugin through 1.0.0 does not properly validate an authentication token in one branch of its email-verification flow, allowing unauthenticated attackers to obtain a valid session as any verified user by supplying only that user's ID.
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 confidenceThe SoftMarket Digital Marketplace WordPress plugin through 1.0.0 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in its email-verification flow. One code path fails to properly validate authentication tokens, allowing unauthenticated attackers to supply only a target user's ID and obtain a valid authenticated session as that user. This enables full account takeover of any verified user account.
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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Identify if SoftMarket Digital Marketplace plugin is installedCheck your WordPress installation for the SoftMarket Digital Marketplace plugin in the plugins directory and read the plugin header to obtain the installed version numberAffected if The plugin is present and the version is 1.0.0 or any earlier version of the same plugin
-
Confirm the email verification feature is activeInspect the plugin settings or database configuration to determine whether the email-verification flow is enabled for user registrationsAffected if Email verification is enabled and the plugin version is within the affected range
-
Verify token validation behavior in the authentication flowReview the plugin code handling the email-verification endpoint, specifically the portion that processes user IDs and authentication tokens, to confirm whether user-supplied IDs are accepted without proper token validationAffected if The plugin accepts user IDs without requiring valid authentication tokens, allowing session forgery
-
Test for authentication bypassIf you have a test environment, attempt to access an account by providing a known user ID in the verification flow without possessing a valid verification tokenAffected if The verification process grants session access based solely on user ID without validating the authentication token
You are affected if the SoftMarket Digital Marketplace plugin version 1.0.0 or earlier is installed and the email-verification feature is enabled, allowing unauthenticated session forgery via user ID manipulation.
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 to a patched version of the plugin when available. Until then, consider disabling the plugin or implementing additional access controls at the web application firewall level to restrict access to the affected authentication endpoints.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-14557 — 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-2026-14557 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