CVE-2026-6670
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 Media Sync plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Path Traversal in all versions up to, and including, 1.4.9 via the 'sub_dir' and 'media_items' parameters. This is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied file paths, which are not checked for directory traversal sequences or restricted to the intended uploads directory. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Author-level access and above, to perform actions on files outside of the originally intended directory.
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 Media Sync WordPress plugin versions up to 1.4.9 suffer from a Path Traversal vulnerability via the 'sub_dir' and 'media_items' parameters. Authenticated attackers with Author-level access or higher can manipulate these parameters to access or manipulate files outside the intended uploads directory due to missing validation for directory traversal sequences.
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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Verify Media Sync plugin is installedCheck the WordPress plugins directory (wp-content/plugins/) for the 'media-sync' folder, or query the wp_options table for 'active_plugins' and look for 'media-sync/media-sync.php'Affected if The plugin folder 'media-sync' exists in the plugins directory or is registered in WordPress as an active plugin
-
Determine installed Media Sync versionRead the plugin header from wp-content/plugins/media-sync/media-sync.php (look for 'Version: x.x.x' line) or check the WordPress plugin admin pageAffected if The version number is 1.4.9 or lower (the 'up to 1.4.9' range means 1.4.9 and all prior versions are affected)
-
Check for existing user roles with Author accessIn WordPress admin, go to Users > All Users and review the role column, or query wp_usermeta table for users with 'wp_capabilities' containing 'author' roleAffected if Any user account with Author role or higher exists in the WordPress installation (authenticated attackers need this access level to exploit the flaw)
-
Inspect HTTP access logs for suspicious parameter usageReview web server access logs (Apache error.log, Nginx access.log) for POST/GET requests to Media Sync endpoints containing 'sub_dir' or 'media_items' parameters with '../' sequencesAffected if Log entries show requests to the plugin with directory traversal sequences (../) in the 'sub_dir' or 'media_items' parameters, indicating potential exploitation attempts
A user is affected if the Media Sync plugin version is 1.4.9 or lower AND any user with Author-level or higher access exists in WordPress, allowing the path traversal vulnerability to be exploited via the 'sub_dir' or 'media_items' parameters.
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 dataImplement strict input validation that rejects directory traversal sequences (e.g., ../) and enforce path containment to ensure all file operations remain within the designated uploads directory.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-6670 — 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-2026-6670 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