dbcve.org
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)Weakness · CWE-918

CVE-2026-5737

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-28
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
74/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges 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 Independent Analytics plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.14.9. This is due to a public tracking route at /wp-json/iawp/search that accepts attacker-controlled referrer_url values when the signature matches, combined with a scheduled favicon fetcher that performs unrestricted cURL requests to stored domains. The signature validation is insufficient because the signature is embedded in publicly-accessible JavaScript and the salt is static per site, allowing attackers to extract valid signatures. The favicon downloader uses raw cURL functions without any SSRF protection mechanisms (no localhost blocking, no private network filtering, and does not use WordPress's wp_safe_remote_* functions). This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject malicious referrer domains into the database and trigger server-side requests to arbitrary hosts including internal services.

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 Independent Analytics WordPress plugin (versions up to 2.14.9) has a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability in its public tracking route /wp-json/iawp/search. Attackers can extract the static salt and embedded signature from publicly-accessible JavaScript, then inject malicious referrer domains into the database. A scheduled favicon fetcher then performs unrestricted cURL requests to these stored domains without any SSRF protection—no localhost/private network blocking and not using WordPress's safe remote functions—allowing unauthenticated attackers to probe internal services.

MitigationUpgrade to version 2.15.0 or later which implements proper SSRF protections (localhost/private network filtering) and uses WordPress's wp_safe_remote_* functions instead of raw cURL, while also fixing the static signature/salt issue.

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
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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. Verify Independent Analytics plugin is installed
    Check WordPress plugin directory or wp-content/plugins/iawp for the plugin folder, or query the database: SELECT option_value FROM wp_options WHERE option_name = 'active_plugins'
    Affected if The plugin appears in active plugins list or plugin directory
  2. Determine installed plugin version
    Check the main plugin file header (iawp.php) for the 'Version' comment, or query: SELECT meta_value FROM wp_postmeta WHERE post_id = (SELECT ID FROM wp_posts WHERE post_name = 'independent-analytics' AND post_type = 'plugin') AND meta_key = 'version'
    Affected if Version is 2.14.9 or earlier (versions 2.15.0 and later contain the fix)
  3. Confirm vulnerable REST API endpoint is accessible
    Send a GET request to /wp-json/iawp/search (no authentication required) and verify the endpoint responds
    Affected if Endpoint returns a valid JSON response, indicating the tracking route is active
  4. Inspect public JavaScript for static salt and signature
    Locate and examine the main JavaScript file enqueued by the plugin (typically in /wp-content/plugins/iawp/public/assets/ or similar), looking for hardcoded salt and signature values in the tracking code
    Affected if Static salt and signature values are present and extractable from publicly accessible JS
  5. Check favicon fetcher behavior for SSRF
    Review the plugin code for the favicon fetching function (search for 'favicon' or 'curl' in PHP files), and check if the plugin stores referrer domains that trigger outbound requests
    Affected if The plugin performs cURL requests to user-supplied domains without validating against localhost/private network ranges or using wp_safe_remote_* functions

The environment is affected if the Independent Analytics plugin version is 2.14.9 or earlier and the plugin's REST API endpoint /wp-json/iawp/search is accessible, allowing injection of arbitrary domains for the favicon fetcher to request without SSRF protections.

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

Upgrade to version 2.15.0 or later which implements proper SSRF protections (localhost/private network filtering) and uses WordPress's wp_safe_remote_* functions instead of raw cURL, while also fixing the static signature/salt issue.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
15.0 hours of engineering $2,640
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,224.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-5737 — 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-2026-5737 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