CVE-2026-4388
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 Form Maker by 10Web plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the Matrix field (Text Box input type) in form submissions in all versions up to, and including, 1.15.40. This is due to insufficient input sanitization (`sanitize_text_field` strips tags but not quotes) and missing output escaping when rendering submission data in the admin Submissions view. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary JavaScript through a form submission that executes in the browser of an administrator who views the submission details.
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 Form Maker by 10Web plugin fails to properly sanitize and escape user input in Matrix field (Text Box) form submissions. The `sanitize_text_field` function strips HTML tags but preserves quotes, allowing attackers to inject JavaScript payloads via attribute injection that execute when administrators view submission details in the admin panel.
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
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check if Form Maker by 10Web is installedNavigate to WordPress admin > Plugins and locate 'Form Maker by 10Web' in the list, or inspect the file /wp-content/plugins/form-maker/version.php for the version constantAffected if Plugin is installed and active
-
Determine the installed plugin versionIn WordPress admin > Plugins, click on the plugin to view its version details, or read the 'Version' field from the plugin header in /wp-content/plugins/form-maker/form-maker.phpAffected if Version is lower than 1.15.41
-
Identify forms using Matrix fieldsGo to Form Maker > Forms, open each form, and check if any form contains a Matrix field type (specifically Text Box type within Matrix)Affected if Any active form contains a Matrix field (Text Box type)
-
Review recent form submissions for malicious payloadsGo to Form Maker > Submissions and examine recent entries, particularly in Matrix fields. Look for quote characters followed by javascript: or on* event handlers in the raw submission dataAffected if Untrusted form submissions exist in the database containing quotes and potential XSS vectors in Matrix fields
You are affected if Form Maker by 10Web is installed with a version lower than 1.15.41 AND you have forms using Matrix fields with untrusted user submissions in your database.
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 dataUpdate to Form Maker by 10Web version 1.15.41 or higher which implements proper input sanitization and output escaping. Until patched, avoid viewing untrusted form submissions in the admin panel and consider disabling the Matrix field type.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $1,936.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4388 — 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-2026-4388 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