CVE-2026-6913
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 Shortcodely plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'widget_area' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.1 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 Shortcodely WordPress plugin versions up to 1.0.1 are vulnerable to stored Cross-Site Scripting via the 'widget_area' parameter due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping, allowing authenticated users with contributor-level permissions to inject arbitrary JavaScript that executes when other users access affected pages.
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.
-
Verify Shortcodely plugin is installedNavigate to WordPress admin > Plugins and confirm Shortcodely appears in the installed plugins list, or inspect the wp-content/plugins/ directory for a shortcodely folderAffected if Shortcodely plugin is not present in the WordPress installation
-
Check installed Shortcodely versionIn WordPress admin > Plugins, find Shortcodely and view the version number displayed below the plugin name, or read the main plugin file header in wp-content/plugins/shortcodely/shortcodely.phpAffected if Version is 1.0.1 or lower
-
Confirm user role has contributor accessCheck WordPress user profiles or user role settings to determine if the account being tested has contributor-level or higher permissions (contributor, author, editor, administrator)Affected if Authenticated user has contributor-level permissions or higher AND Shortcodely version is 1.0.1 or lower
-
Identify widget_area parameter usageSearch WordPress database or plugin settings for usage of the widget_area parameter in postmeta tables or plugin options, or check if shortcodes/widgets using this parameter exist in pages or postsAffected if The widget_area parameter is being used or stored in the WordPress database
A user is affected if the Shortcodely plugin versions 1.0.1 or lower is installed AND an authenticated user with contributor-level permissions can access or modify the widget_area parameter, allowing stored XSS execution.
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 Shortcodely plugin to a version beyond 1.0.1 that addresses the input sanitization and output escaping deficiencies, or implement proper sanitization on the 'widget_area' parameter and escape output before rendering.
- 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-2026-6913 — 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-2026-6913 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