dbcve.org
Cross-site Scripting (XSS)Weakness · CWE-79

CVE-2026-4005

MEDIUM · 6.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-04-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
70/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
The Coachific Shortcode plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'userhash' shortcode attribute in all versions up to and including 1.0. This is due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. The plugin uses sanitize_text_field() on the 'userhash' parameter, which strips HTML tags but does not escape characters significant in a JavaScript string context (such as double quotes, semicolons, and parentheses). The sanitized value is then directly interpolated into a JavaScript string within a <script> tag on line 29 without any JavaScript-specific escaping (e.g., wp_json_encode() or esc_js()). This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page.

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 confidence

The Coachific Shortcode plugin for WordPress fails to properly escape the 'userhash' shortcode attribute when embedding it into JavaScript code. While sanitize_text_field() strips HTML tags, it does not escape characters significant in JavaScript string contexts (double quotes, semicolons, parentheses). This allows an attacker to break out of the JavaScript string and inject arbitrary scripts that execute when users view the affected page.

MitigationReplace or supplement sanitize_text_field() with JavaScript-specific escaping functions such as wp_json_encode() or esc_js() when outputting the userhash value into the <script> tag on line 29.

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
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

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate the Coachific Shortcode plugin files
    Check for the presence of the plugin by looking in wp-content/plugins/ for a directory named 'coachific-shortcode' or similar. Identify the main plugin PHP file.
    Affected if The plugin directory exists on the server
  2. Check the installed plugin version
    Open the main plugin PHP file and look for the 'Version' header in the plugin comment block, or check the version in a readme.txt file if present.
    Affected if The version cannot be determined or is unknown - assume affected until proven otherwise
  3. Identify the vulnerable shortcode handler
    Search the plugin PHP files for the shortcode registration containing 'userhash' and locate the function that handles the shortcode output.
    Affected if A shortcode handler function that processes the 'userhash' attribute exists
  4. Examine how userhash is output in JavaScript context
    Look for the code that outputs the userhash value inside a <script> tag or inline JavaScript. Specifically check around line 29 for echo or print statements that place the userhash value into JavaScript code.
    Affected if The code uses sanitize_text_field() on userhash and outputs it directly into JavaScript without additional escaping like esc_js() or wp_json_encode()
  5. Determine if the shortcode is in use
    Search the WordPress database or site content for instances of the shortcode [coachific] or similar that include the userhash attribute.
    Affected if The shortcode with userhash attribute is actively used in posts, pages, or widgets

A user is affected if the Coachific Shortcode plugin is installed, the userhash attribute is processed and output into JavaScript without esc_js() or wp_json_encode() escaping, and the shortcode is actually being used on the site.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Replace or supplement sanitize_text_field() with JavaScript-specific escaping functions such as wp_json_encode() or esc_js() when outputting the userhash value into the <script> tag on line 29.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
6.0 hours of engineering $1,060
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4005 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-4005 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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