CVE-2026-42192
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 · uneditedPlunk is an open-source email platform built on top of AWS SES. Prior to version 0.9.0, a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the campaign management feature, where the email body content created by authenticated project members is stored and later rendered in the admin dashboard using React's dangerouslySetInnerHTML without any HTML sanitization. This allows a lower-privileged member to embed malicious scripts in a campaign's email body that execute in the context of any admin or other member who views the campaign, potentially enabling session hijacking or unauthorized actions on their behalf. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.0.
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 stored XSS vulnerability in Plunk's campaign management feature allows authenticated project members to inject malicious JavaScript into campaign email body content. The injected payload is stored and later rendered in the admin dashboard using React's dangerouslySetInnerHTML without any HTML sanitization, causing the script to execute in the context of any admin or member who views the campaign.
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
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Plunk installation and versionLocate the Plunk application and determine its installed version by checking package.json, version file, or running 'plunk --version' or checking the application's about/settings pageAffected if The installed version is lower than 0.9.0 (e.g., 0.8.x, 0.7.x, etc.)
-
Verify campaign management feature is activeCheck if the campaign management module is enabled by inspecting the application's feature flags, configuration files, or by logging in and navigating to the campaigns sectionAffected if The campaign management feature is enabled and accessible to authenticated users
-
Inspect stored campaign content for malicious payloadsQuery the database or access the campaign storage to examine email body content stored in the campaigns table. Look for script tags, event handlers (onclick, onerror, etc.), or other JavaScript injection patterns in the body fieldAffected if Any campaign records contain unsanitized HTML or script tags in the email body content
-
Check rendering implementation for sanitizationExamine the frontend code or application logs to verify how campaign content is rendered. Specifically look for usage of dangerouslySetInnerHTML without prior sanitization (e.g., DOMPurify, sanitize-html)Affected if Campaign content is rendered via dangerouslySetInnerHTML or similar unsafe HTML insertion without server-side HTML sanitization applied beforehand
You are affected if Plunk version is below 0.9.0 AND the campaign management feature is in use, since the stored XSS can execute when admins view campaign content rendered without HTML sanitization.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to version 0.9.0 or later which includes proper HTML sanitization before rendering campaign content via dangerouslySetInnerHTML. If upgrading is not possible, implement server-side HTML sanitization (e.g., using DOMPurify) on all campaign body content before storage.
version 0.9.0
- Back up your current Plunk instance data and configuration
- Upgrade Plunk to version 0.9.0
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version number
- Test that campaign email body content is now properly sanitized before rendering
- Ensure all users clear their sessions after upgrade as a precaution
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-42192 — 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-2026-42192 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