CVE-2026-2495
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 WPNakama – Team and multi-Client Collaboration, Editorial and Project Management plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'order' parameter of the '/wp-json/WPNakama/v1/boards' REST API endpoint in all versions up to, and including, 0.6.5. This is due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database.
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 SQL injection in the WPNakama WordPress plugin via the 'order' parameter in the /wp-json/WPNakama/v1/boards REST API endpoint. The parameter lacks proper escaping and the SQL query doesn't use prepared statements, allowing attackers to inject arbitrary SQL and extract sensitive database information.
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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Verify WPNakama plugin is installedIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and look for WPNakama, or check the plugin directory /wp-content/plugins/ for a folder named WPNakamaAffected if WPNakama plugin is present on the WordPress site
-
Check installed WPNakama versionIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and find the version number listed under WPNakama, or read the main plugin file (e.g., wp-content/plugins/WPNakama/wp-nakama.php) and look for the Version header in the plugin commentsAffected if Version is 0.6.5 or lower (any version up to and including 0.6.5)
-
Confirm REST API endpoint is accessibleSend a GET request to https://your-site.com/wp-json/WPNakama/v1/boards without any authentication headers or cookiesAffected if The endpoint returns a valid HTTP 200 response (the vulnerability is unauthenticated)
-
Identify if the order parameter is processedSend a request to /wp-json/WPNakama/v1/boards?order=anything and observe if the parameter is used in the SQL query without sanitizationAffected if The endpoint accepts and processes the 'order' parameter without error or proper escaping
If WPNakama version 0.6.5 or lower is installed AND the /wp-json/WPNakama/v1/boards endpoint is accessible without authentication, the site is affected by this SQL injection vulnerability.
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 the WPNakama plugin to a version beyond 0.6.5 when available. Until then, consider disabling the plugin, blocking the REST API endpoint via WAF, or restricting unauthenticated access to the endpoint.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-2495 — 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-2026-2495 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