CVE-2026-2554
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 WCFM – Frontend Manager for WooCommerce along with Bookings Subscription Listings Compatible plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 6.7.25 via the 'wcfm_delete_wcfm_customer' due to missing validation on the 'customerid' user controlled key. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Vendor-level access and above, to delete arbitrary users, including Administrators.
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 confidenceThe WCFM Frontend Manager plugin for WordPress contains an Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability in the wcfm_delete_wcfm_customer function. The 'customerid' parameter is not validated or authorized, allowing any authenticated user with Vendor-level access or higher to delete arbitrary WordPress users, including Administrators.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Confirm WCFM Frontend Manager plugin is installedIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and locate 'WCFM - Frontend Manager for WooCommerce' or check the plugin files for version information in the plugin header commentAffected if Plugin is not installed or cannot be found, then not affected by this CVE
-
Identify installed plugin versionView the plugin version number in the Plugins list or read the main plugin file header (usually wcfm.php) to extract the Version fieldAffected if Version is lower than 6.7.26 (e.g., 6.7.25, 6.7.x series below 6.7.26, or earlier major versions)
-
Verify Vendor or higher user roles existNavigate to WordPress Users menu and examine user roles. Check for users assigned the 'Vendor' role provided by WCFM, or any custom roles with elevated capabilitiesAffected if At least one user account has Vendor-level access or higher (Shop Manager, Vendor, or custom elevated roles)
-
Review user deletion activity in audit logsCheck WordPress activity logs, WCFM-specific logs, or server access logs for calls to the wcfm_delete_wcfm_customer endpoint (typically via POST to /?wc-ajax=wcfm_delete_wcfm_customer)Affected if Recent or historical user deletion events exist that were performed by users without Administrator privileges
A user is affected if the WCFM Frontend Manager plugin version is below 6.7.26 AND at least one user with Vendor-level or higher access exists in the WordPress environment, allowing potential exploitation of the unprotected customerid parameter.
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 plugin to version 6.7.26 or later which includes proper authorization validation on the customerid parameter. Until then, restrict Vendor-level permissions and monitor for suspicious user deletion activity.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,152.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-2554 — 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-2026-2554 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