Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessIdentify site running Prenotazioni ≤1.7.5
-
DeliveryDeliver crafted unauthenticated settings-save (CSRF) request
-
ExploitStore XSS payload in plugin settings
-
ExecutionAdmin or visitor loads affected page
-
PersistScript executes in victim browser
-
ImpactSteal session / take over admin account
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A05:2025 - Injection
ASVS 5.0
V1 - Encoding and Sanitization Output encoding, context-aware escaping
MITRE ATT&CK
2 techniques across 2 tactics: Initial Access, Execution The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Exploitation requires the Prenotazioni plugin (version ≤1.7.5) to be installed and active, and depends on the specific settings fields that are saved without authorisation/CSRF validation and rendered without output escaping. No valid authentication or account is needed to inject the payload (missing auth + CSRF checks on the settings-save handler), but execution requires user interaction (UI:R): a privileged administrator must open the page where the unescaped setting is output, or a visitor must view the affected front-end rendering. Limiting factors: the payload only fires on page view (no automatic execution), SSVC rates it non-automatable, and impact is scoped to whatever the victim's browser session can do (typically admin-session abuse rather than direct server compromise). |
| Impact | Signals are moderate and partly conflicting. The input CVSS of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) treats this as near-critical, but that rating assigns full High confidentiality/integrity/availability impact with an unchanged scope, which overstates a settings-based stored XSS: the executed script runs in the victim browser's security context, so a scope change with lower direct impact is more defensible - hence my independent reassessment lands around 6.1. The genuinely elevated factor is PR:N: because the save routine lacks authorisation and CSRF checks, an unauthenticated attacker can plant the payload, which is worse than a typical authenticated-contributor XSS. Offsetting this, UI:R means an administrator (or visitor) must load the affected page for the payload to fire, and SSVC rates Exploitation as 'none' and Automatable as 'no', indicating no observed active exploitation and no reliable mass-automation path, even though SSVC Technical Impact is 'total'. A public exploit exists (WPScan), raising the practical likelihood above a theoretical bug, but this is a POC, not confirmed in-the-wild use - KEV status is absent. Net: a real and worth-patching issue driven mainly by the unauthenticated write + CSRF gap, but not an emergency-tier internet-wide threat, and the 8.8 input score should be treated with caution. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An attacker crafts a page or request that, when triggered (e.g. via CSRF or direct unauthenticated POST), saves malicious JavaScript into the Prenotazioni plugin settings on a target WordPress site. Because the settings are later rendered without escaping, the script executes when an administrator opens the plugin/settings page or when a visitor views an affected front-end output, enabling session/cookie theft or admin-account takeover. A public proof-of-concept is available from WPScan, lowering the barrier to reproduction. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Oct 11, 2026
Stored cross-site scripting in the Prenotazioni WordPress plugin (all versions up to and including 1.7.5) lets an unauthenticated attacker write arbitrary JavaScript into plugin settings that are saved without any capability or CSRF check and then rendered without output escaping. The payload persists in the site database and executes in the browser of any administrator opening the affected settings screen or any visitor viewing the affected front-end rendering, so impact is scoped to the privileges of the victim's own session rather than to the server itself. A public proof-of-concept/write-up is available (WPScan), while SSVC records exploitation status as 'none' and non-automatable; no EPSS score was supplied. Note the discrepancy between the researcher-assigned 8.8 (S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H) and our independent assessment (S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N), which treats confidentiality and integrity impact as limited because execution requires a page view (UI:R) and only affects the victim's browser session.
RemediationAI
No vendor-released patch or fixed version number is identified in the available data, so track the WPScan advisory (https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/9fde6498-7d23-4419-9416-d5f50ca97c4a/) and the plugin's WordPress.org page for a release above 1.7.5 and upgrade immediately when it appears. Until then the most reliable mitigation is to deactivate and, if the booking functionality is not required, uninstall the Prenotazioni plugin, accepting the loss of its reservation features as the trade-off. If the plugin must stay live, you can neutralise the injection path by adding a small mu-plugin that hooks the plugin's settings-save action and enforces a current_user_can('manage_options') check plus wp_verify_nonce()/check_admin_referer() before the option is written; the trade-off is that you must keep the hook names in sync with the plugin and that legitimate unauthenticated or low-privilege save flows, if any, will break. Restricting wp-admin and admin-ajax.php to trusted IPs or HTTP authentication reduces administrator-side exposure but does nothing for the front-end rendering path, and a WAF with virtual patching for POSTs to the plugin's settings endpoint and for script/HTML payloads in saved options helps only if it inspects the stored value on later page responses. Adding a restrictive Content-Security-Policy (disallowing inline and untrusted scripts) can blunt execution but frequently breaks other plugins and themes. Because exploitation requires only a page view by a privileged user, also scan the wp_options table for injected script markup and force password/session resets for administrators who viewed affected pages.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affected Packages
Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)
Affects your stack
Affects 1 package in euvd
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
The affected component is a WordPress plugin, not a standalone service; the CPE cpe:2.3:a:unknown:prenotazioni:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* reflects that no authoritative vendor namespace was mapped, and EUVD lists the affected range as Prenotazioni 0 through 1.7.5. The root cause is CWE-79 (Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation) combined with a broken access-control and anti-CSRF design in the plugin's settings-save handler: WordPress plugins typically persist options via admin-post.php, admin-ajax.php, or an options.php registration, and secure implementations must verify a nonce (check_admin_referer / wp_verify_nonce) and a capability check (current_user_can) before writing, then escape on output with esc_attr(), esc_html(), or wp_kses(). Here both the authentication/CSRF gate and the output-escaping stage are missing for some settings fields, so an unauthenticated request (CVSS vector contains PR:N, confirming no credentials are required) can store markup that is later emitted verbatim. The injection is triggered only when a page containing the unescaped value is loaded, which is why the assessed vector carries UI:R; the delivery is remote (AV:N) and the complexity is low (AC:L). The independent assessment's scope-change (S:C) reflects that the injected script escapes the plugin's own security context into the broader WordPress admin or front-end origin, where it can act with the victim's session.
Know when Prenotazioni gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Unauthenticated injection via missing auth/CSRF (PR:N) but payload executes only when a victim loads the page (UI:R); XSS crosses into the browser context (S:C) with limited C/I and no availability impact.
Primary rating from Vendor (WPScan).
CVSS VectorVendor: WPScan
Lifecycle Timeline
3DescriptionCVE.org
The Prenotazioni WordPress plugin through 1.7.5 does not have authorisation and CSRF checks when saving its settings, and does not escape some of them when outputting them, allowing unauthenticated users to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks against administrators and site visitors.
Technical POC Analysis
CWE-79 (Improper Neutralisation of Input During Web Page Generation), stored variant, arising from two independent defects in the same code path: Missing access control on the settings write path.
Full technical POC analysis - root cause, step-by-step exploitation and patch breakdown - is part of the Pro and Business plans.
Executive ViewAI
The Prenotazioni WordPress plugin, all versions up to and including 1.7.5, contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability that can allow a remote actor to persist malicious JavaScript in site settings and front-end content. Because publicly available exploit code exists and no vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis, affected organizations face session compromise for administrators and visitors, with potential unauthorized actions, data exposure, and site integrity damage. Leadership should prioritize containment and removal or mitigation of the plugin while monitoring for exploitation.
No vendor-released patch identified at time of analysis; interim mitigations include disabling or removing the Prenotazioni plugin (all versions up to and including 1.7.5), restricting wp-admin and plugin settings access to trusted administrators, enforcing least privilege, deploying WAF/virtual patching to block XSS payloads, and monitoring administrator sessions and logs for suspicious activity.
Threat Intelligence Overview
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
Cross-Site Scripting occurs when an application accepts untrusted data and sends it to a web browser without proper validation or encoding.
Cross-Site Request Forgery exploits the automatic credential inclusion behavior of web browsers.
EUVD-2026-96735
GHSA-2429-hhqm-qvw2
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
Exploit-DB