CVE-2026-39621
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 · uneditedCross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in spicethemes SpicePress spicepress allows Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server.This issue affects SpicePress: from n/a through <= 2.3.2.5.
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 confidenceA Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the SpicePress WordPress theme (versions <= 2.3.2.5) allows remote attackers to trick authenticated administrators into unknowingly uploading malicious files (web shells) to the server by crafting malicious requests that the victim's browser automatically submits.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Identify if SpicePress theme is installedCheck your WordPress installation's wp-content/themes directory for the spicepress folder, or look in WordPress admin under Appearance > ThemesAffected if SpicePress theme is present in the themes directory
-
Determine the installed SpicePress versionOpen the style.css file in wp-content/themes/spicepress/ and look for the 'Version:' declaration in the file header commentAffected if The version number cannot be confirmed as patched or the theme is outdated
-
Locate file upload functionalitySearch theme files (especially in functions.php and any custom-post-type or plugin folders) for file upload handlers, form handling code, or functions that process file uploads via wp_handle_upload or similar WordPress upload functionsAffected if The theme contains file upload handling code without nonce verification
-
Check upload endpoints for CSRF protectionExamine the PHP code handling file uploads for presence of wp_verify_nonce or check_admin_referer calls before processing the upload. Look for nonce verification in form handling and AJAX endpointsAffected if File upload code lacks nonce verification or uses insufficient CSRF protection
-
Verify admin session requirementsConfirm the file upload functionality requires administrator authentication by checking if current_user_can('administrator') or similar capability checks are performedAffected if Upload endpoints process requests from authenticated administrators without CSRF safeguards
You are affected if SpicePress theme is installed with file upload functionality that lacks proper nonce/CSRF token validation on admin-action endpoints.
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 dataImplement anti-CSRF token (nonce) validation on all state-changing operations, particularly file upload functionality, and verify Origin/Referer headers to prevent cross-origin requests.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-39621 — 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-2026-39621 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