CVE-2026-4859
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 SP Blog Designer plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'design' attribute of the `wpsbd_post_carousel` shortcode in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.0 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. 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 confidenceThe SP Blog Designer WordPress plugin <= 1.0.0 contains a stored XSS vulnerability in the wpsbd_post_carousel shortcode's 'design' attribute. Authenticated attackers with Contributor-level permissions can inject malicious JavaScript via insufficient input sanitization, which executes when users view pages containing the crafted shortcode.
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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Confirm SP Blog Designer plugin is installedLog into WordPress admin, go to Plugins > Installed Plugins, and look for 'SP Blog Designer' in the list. Note the installed version number displayed.Affected if The plugin is installed and the version is 1.0.0 or lower.
-
Identify posts using the vulnerable shortcodeSearch the WordPress database (via phpMyAdmin or WP CLI) for content containing the string 'wpsbd_post_carousel'. Example WP CLI command: wp post list --s='wpsbd_post_carousel' --format=idsAffected if Any published post, page, or custom post type contains the wpsbd_post_carousel shortcode.
-
Inspect the shortcode for the design attributeExamine the content of posts identified in step 2. Look for the 'design' attribute within the shortcode, for example: [wpsbd_post_carousel design="..."]Affected if The shortcode is present and includes a 'design' attribute with any value.
-
Check for unsanitized input in the design attributeReview the value assigned to the design attribute. If it contains quotes, angle brackets, or JavaScript-like patterns (such as javascript:, onload=, onerror=, <script>), this indicates potential exploitation.Affected if The design attribute contains special characters or scriptable content that could execute as JavaScript in a browser.
If the SP Blog Designer plugin version is 1.0.0 or lower AND the wpsbd_post_carousel shortcode with a 'design' attribute is present in any published content, the environment is affected by this stored XSS vulnerability.
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 dataUntil an official patch is released, remove or disable the wpsbd_post_carousel shortcode from all published content. If possible, restrict contributor-level user permissions or implement interim output encoding at the theme/template level for affected shortcodes.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-4859 — 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-2026-4859 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