CVE-2026-2707
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 weForms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the REST API entry submission endpoint in all versions up to, and including, 1.6.27. This is due to inconsistent input sanitization between the frontend AJAX handler and the REST API endpoint. When entries are submitted via the REST API (`/wp-json/weforms/v1/forms/{id}/entries/`), the `prepare_entry()` method in `class-abstract-fields.php` receives the WP_REST_Request object as `$args`, bypassing the `weforms_clean()` fallback that sanitizes `$_POST` data for frontend submissions. The base field handler only applies `trim()` to the value. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts into form entry hidden field values via the REST API that execute when an administrator views the form entries page, where data is rendered using a Vue.js `v-html` directive without escaping.
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 analysisUntrusted input is placed into a web page without being neutralised, so an attacker's markup or script executes in another user's browser. That can hijack sessions, capture keystrokes, or silently perform actions as the victim. Fixing it properly means context-aware output encoding everywhere data meets HTML, backed by a content-security policy as a second line of defence.
General guidance for the cross-site scripting (xss) class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
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 · scopedweForms version 1.6.28 or later (the first version containing the REST API input sanitization fix from PR #263)
- Check the current installed version of the weForms plugin using the WordPress admin dashboard under Plugins > Installed Plugins
- Navigate to the weForms GitHub repository and review the patch at https://github.com/BoldGrid/weforms/pull/263 to understand the fix implementation
- Upgrade weForms to the version that includes the patch - typically version 1.6.28 or later which contains the REST API input sanitization fix
- After upgrading, verify the fix is applied by checking that the `prepare_entry()` method now properly sanitizes input from the REST API request object
- Test the REST API endpoint `/wp-json/weforms/v1/forms/{id}/entries/` to confirm it now properly sanitizes input
- Ensure any custom code or integrations using the weForms REST API continue to function after the update
- Review form entries as an administrator to confirm the Vue.js rendering now properly escapes content
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-2707 — 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-2026-2707 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