CVE-2026-5110
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 Gravity Forms plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Unauthenticated Stored Cross-Site Scripting in versions up to and including 2.10.0. This is due to insufficient input validation and output escaping in the SingleProduct field when used inside a Repeater field. When SingleProduct fields are nested within Repeater fields, the validation flow bypasses the state validation mechanism (failed_state_validation()) that would normally prevent tampering with field values. The validate_subfield() method only calls the field's validate() method, which for SingleProduct fields only validates the quantity field and does not check the product name field for tampering. As a result, an attacker can inject arbitrary HTML and JavaScript into the product name field (input .1). This malicious input is then saved to the database without sanitization because sanitize_entry_value() returns raw values when HTML is not expected for the field type. When an administrator views the entry in wp-admin/admin.php?page=gf_entries, the get_value_entry_detail() method outputs the product name without escaping, causing the stored XSS payload to execute in the administrator's browser. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever an administrator accesses an entry containing the malicious payload.
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 Gravity Forms plugin fails to properly validate and sanitize the SingleProduct field's product name when nested inside a Repeater field. The validate_subfield() method bypasses state validation and the SingleProduct validate() only checks quantity, not the product name. This allows unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious HTML/JavaScript via input .1 that persists unsanitized in the database and executes when administrators view entries via get_value_entry_detail() which outputs the value without escaping.
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 Gravity Forms versionLocate the Gravity Forms plugin file (commonly at /wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/gravityforms.php) and read the 'Version' comment or header. Alternatively, query the WordPress options table: SELECT option_value FROM wp_options WHERE option_name = 'rg_form_version' or check the plugins admin page.Affected if version is below 2.10.1 (the patched release)
-
Identify Repeater fields in formsQuery the WordPress database for forms containing repeater fields. For each form ID, inspect the form meta in the wp_gf_form_meta table where the 'fields' column contains JSON. Look for field objects where 'type' = 'repeater'.Affected if any form contains a Repeater field
-
Check for SingleProduct fields inside RepeatersExamine the form meta JSON for Repeater field objects. Within each Repeater, inspect the 'fields' sub-array for objects where 'type' = 'singleproduct'.Affected if any SingleProduct field is nested inside a Repeater field
-
Inspect entry data for unsanitized product namesQuery the wp_gf_entry_meta or wp_gf_entry_detail tables. Look for meta_key values containing product-related field identifiers (often formatted as 'field_ID.1' per the CVE description). Examine the meta_value for unescaped HTML, script tags, or suspicious JavaScript event handlers.Affected if entries contain raw HTML/JavaScript in SingleProduct name fields from forms with Repeaters
Environment is affected if Gravity Forms version is below 2.10.1 AND any form contains a SingleProduct field nested inside a Repeater field, particularly if unsanitized entry data already exists in the 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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Gravity Forms to version 2.10.1 or later which addresses the validation bypass and adds proper output escaping. Until then, restrict or monitor form submissions containing Repeater fields with SingleProduct fields.
Gravity Forms version 2.10.1 or later
- Check your current Gravity Forms version by navigating to Plugins in wp-admin and looking at the Gravity Forms version number
- Backup your WordPress database and files before any upgrade
- From WordPress admin, go to Dashboard > Updates and update Gravity Forms to the latest version, or manually upload the latest Gravity Forms plugin from wordpress.org/plugins/gravityforms
- After updating, verify the version is above 2.10.0 by checking the Plugins page
- Test that form submissions with SingleProduct fields inside Repeater fields work correctly in a staging environment before deploying to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-5110 — 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-2026-5110 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