CVE-2026-15300
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 GEO my WP plugin for WordPress was vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'distance', 'lat', and 'lng' parameters in versions up to, and including, 4.5.4. The values were read from $_SERVER['QUERY_STRING'] via parse_str() (bypassing wp_magic_quotes, which does not cover $_SERVER), then passed through bare esc_sql() before being interpolated into unquoted numeric positions in the proximity-search query (HAVING/SELECT clause distance math, BETWEEN bounding-box pre-filter) built by gmw_locations_query() in plugins/posts-locator/includes/class-gmw-wp-query.php. Because esc_sql() only escapes string delimiters and these positions are numeric, payloads such as `1 OR SLEEP(3)` survived sanitization. Fixed in 4.5.5 by adding an upstream is_numeric() guard that short-circuits the WHERE clause to `AND 1 = 0` when either coordinate is non-numeric, and by replacing the three esc_sql() calls with (float) casts.
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 GEO my WP WordPress plugin up to version 4.5.4 is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'distance', 'lat', and 'lng' parameters. The vulnerability stems from reading these parameters from $_SERVER['QUERY_STRING'] via parse_str(), which bypasses wp_magic_quotes protection. Values were then passed through esc_sql() but used in numeric contexts (HAVING/SELECT distance math and BETWEEN bounding-box pre-filter) where esc_sql() provides no protection since it only escapes string delimiters. This allowed SQL payloads like '1 OR SLEEP(3)' to execute.
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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
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 GEO my WP is installedCheck your WordPress plugins directory or WordPress admin under Plugins > Installed Plugins. Locate GEO my WP and note the version displayed.Affected if GEO my WP is installed and the displayed version is 4.5.4 or lower
-
Check plugin version numberOpen the main plugin file (geowp.php or similar in wp-content/plugins/geowp/) and locate the version definition in the plugin header comment. Compare this version number to the affected range.Affected if The version defined in the plugin header is 4.5.4 or lower
-
Locate vulnerable code handling query string parametersSearch the plugin directory for files containing 'parse_str' combined with 'QUERY_STRING'. Also look for usage of the variables $distance, $lat, or $lng that originate from parse_str(). The vulnerable pattern reads these parameters directly from $_SERVER['QUERY_STRING'].Affected if The plugin code contains parse_str($_SERVER['QUERY_STRING']) and uses the resulting $distance, $lat, or $lng variables in SQL queries
-
Inspect SQL query construction for numeric parameter usageExamine the code paths identified in step 3. Look for instances where these parameters are passed through esc_sql() and used in numeric SQL contexts such as HAVING clauses, distance calculations, or BETWEEN clauses for bounding box filtering.Affected if The vulnerable parameters are passed through esc_sql() and used in numeric SQL contexts (HAVING, distance math, or BETWEEN) without proper numeric type casting or is_numeric() validation
-
Confirm the site processes requests with vulnerable parametersReview web server logs or traffic for requests to your site that include 'distance=', 'lat=', or 'lng=' in the query string, typically on pages using GEO my WP functionality (such as locators or proximity searches).Affected if Your site processes or has processed HTTP requests containing distance, lat, or lng parameters in the query string on pages that load GEO my WP functionality
You are affected if GEO my WP version 4.5.4 or lower is installed and your site processes query string parameters (distance, lat, lng) through the vulnerable code paths that use esc_sql() in numeric SQL contexts.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to GEO my WP version 4.5.5 or later, which implements is_numeric() guards that short-circuit to 'AND 1 = 0' for non-numeric input and replaces esc_sql() with (float) casts for proper numeric sanitization.
4.5.5
- Backup your WordPress site before making any changes
- Update the GEO my WP plugin to version 4.5.5 or later through the WordPress admin dashboard (Plugins > Add New > Upload or directly from the WordPress plugin repository)
- Verify the update was successful by checking the plugin version in Plugins > Installed Plugins
- Test the proximity search functionality (using the lat/lng/distance parameters) to ensure the fix does not break legitimate functionality
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-15300 — 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-2026-15300 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