dbcve.org
Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)Weakness · CWE-352

CVE-2026-8907

MEDIUM · 6.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-09
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
68/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges

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 WP-Ultimate-Map plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in versions up to, and including, 1.1. This is due to missing nonce validation on the process_init() function hooked to admin_init, which saves plugin settings (zoom-level, focus-lat, focus-lng, sel_places, sel_routes) via update_option() based solely on the presence of a save-setting POST parameter. Additionally, the saved values — particularly zoom-level — are stored without sanitization and later echoed into an HTML attribute (and inline JavaScript) on the settings page without escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to change plugin settings and inject arbitrary web scripts via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.

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 WP-Ultimate-Map plugin for WordPress versions up to 1.1 lacks CSRF protection on its settings save functionality. The process_init() function hooked to admin_init processes setting updates via update_option() without verifying a nonce, allowing attackers to forge requests. Additionally, saved settings (zoom-level, focus-lat, focus-lng, sel_places, sel_routes) are stored without sanitization and later echoed into HTML/JavaScript contexts without escaping, enabling stored XSS injection via forged requests.

MitigationAdd nonce verification to the process_init() function, implement input sanitization using WordPress sanitization functions before storing settings, and apply proper output escaping (esc_attr, esc_js) when displaying settings in HTML attributes and inline JavaScript.

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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm WP-Ultimate-Map plugin is installed
    Navigate to WordPress admin > Plugins and look for WP-Ultimate-Map in the list of installed plugins, or check the /wp-content/plugins/ directory for the plugin folder.
    Affected if The plugin is installed and active.
  2. Locate the process_init() function
    Access the plugin files via FTP or file manager, then open the main plugin PHP file (usually named like ultimate-map.php or similar) and search for 'function process_init'. Examine the code within this function.
    Affected if The process_init() function exists and is hooked to admin_init, and the function handles settings via update_option() without a nonce check.
  3. Check for missing nonce validation
    Within the process_init() function, look for wp_verify_nonce() or check_admin_referer() calls. Search specifically around the code that handles the settings parameters: zoom-level, focus-lat, focus-lng, sel_places, sel_routes.
    Affected if No nonce verification is performed before processing the settings update.
  4. Inspect how settings are stored
    Find where update_option() is called for the plugin settings. Check if the input values (zoom-level, focus-lat, etc.) are passed through sanitization functions like sanitize_text_field() before storage.
    Affected if Settings are stored directly via update_option() without sanitization functions.
  5. Check settings output for escaping
    Find where these settings are retrieved (via get_option()) and echoed into HTML. Look for the use of esc_attr(), esc_html(), or esc_js() when outputting the values into HTML attributes or inline JavaScript.
    Affected if Plugin settings are echoed into HTML or JavaScript without proper escaping functions.

The environment is affected if the WP-Ultimate-Map plugin is installed and its process_init() function processes settings without nonce validation, stores them without sanitization, or outputs them without escaping.

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

Add nonce verification to the process_init() function, implement input sanitization using WordPress sanitization functions before storing settings, and apply proper output escaping (esc_attr, esc_js) when displaying settings in HTML attributes and inline JavaScript.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
8.0 hours of engineering $1,420
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-8907 — 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-2026-8907 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