CVE-2026-2893
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 Page and Post Clone plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to SQL Injection via the 'meta_key' parameter in the content_clone() function in all versions up to, and including, 6.3. This is due to insufficient escaping on the user-supplied meta_key value and insufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database. The injection is second-order: the malicious payload is stored as a post meta key and executed when the post is cloned.
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 Page and Post Clone WordPress plugin contains a second-order SQL injection vulnerability in the content_clone() function. The meta_key parameter is not properly escaped before being used in an SQL query, and the query lacks prepared statements, allowing authenticated attackers with Contributor-level access to inject malicious SQL payloads that execute when a post is cloned.
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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 Page and Post Clone plugin is installedIn WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins and look for 'Page and Post Clone' or check the wp-content/plugins directory for a folder containing 'clone' in the nameAffected if the plugin is present on the system
-
Identify the installed plugin versionIn WordPress admin Plugins list, click on the plugin to view details and read the version number; alternatively check the main plugin PHP file for the Version header in the plugin comment blockAffected if the version is below 6.4 (the fix was released in version 6.4)
-
Confirm Contributor role access existsNavigate to Users > Users in WordPress admin and check if any users have the Contributor role assignedAffected if at least one Contributor-level user account exists on the site
-
Inspect the vulnerable function in source codeLocate the plugin PHP files and search for the content_clone function; examine how the meta_key parameter is handled in SQL queries (look for direct variable insertion without prepare() or escaping)Affected if the meta_key parameter is used in SQL queries without proper escaping or prepared statements
You are affected if the Page and Post Clone plugin is installed with a version below 6.4 and any Contributor-level user accounts exist on the site.
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 dataUpgrade to version 6.4 or later, which addresses the SQL injection vulnerability by properly escaping the meta_key parameter and using prepared statements.
- 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-2026-2893 — 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-2026-2893 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