Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessIdentify WordPress site running Fluent Forms ≤6.2.8 with payments enabled
-
DeliveryObserve submission ID and form ID from confirmation page or URL
-
ExploitEnumerate transaction creation timestamps at ~900 candidates/second
-
ExecutionCraft valid transaction hash for 'transaction' parameter
-
PersistSubmit unauthenticated receipt request
-
ImpactHarvest victim PII and payment data from response
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A01:2025 - Broken Access Control
ASVS 5.0
V8 - Authorization Object-level authorization, IDOR prevention
|
| Exploitation Conditions | Exploitation requires that the WordPress site has Fluent Forms version 6.2.8 or earlier installed AND has the payment integration module actively configured with real transaction records present. The attacker must be able to identify or infer a valid (submission ID, form ID) pair - these values are frequently surfaced in order confirmation page URLs or email receipt metadata visible to any user who completes a form. The effective limit on exploitation is the need to correctly pair submission and form IDs before iterating timestamps; sites with very low transaction volume offer fewer valid targets, while high-volume e-commerce installations present a proportionally larger and more valuable attack surface. No authentication is required - the CVSS vector PR:N/AV:N/AC:L confirms fully unauthenticated network exploitation against any reachable WordPress installation meeting the above conditions. |
| Impact | The CVSS 3.1 score of 5.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N) classifies this as Medium, and the C:L metric accurately reflects that only specific transaction records - not the full database - are exposed. However, the real-world severity for payment-enabled WordPress sites exceeds what this score communicates: the exposed fields (name, email, billing address, payment method, payment status) constitute PII and financial data subject to GDPR, CCPA, and PCI-DSS notification obligations. The AC:L metric is well-justified - the description confirms that the observable inputs reduce brute-force to ~900 candidates per second, which is practical without specialized tooling. No KEV listing and no confirmed public POC exist at time of analysis, which modestly reduces urgency for sites with low transaction volume. Sites processing significant payment volume present a larger and more rewarding attack surface. There is no conflict between the CVSS vector and the description - both confirm unauthenticated network exploitation - but defenders should weight the compliance exposure more heavily than the numeric score alone implies. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An unauthenticated attacker identifies a WordPress site running Fluent Forms 6.2.8 or earlier with active payment forms. By observing a submission ID and form ID from a publicly visible order confirmation page, the attacker iterates through plausible creation timestamps at approximately 900 hash candidates per second until the transaction receipt endpoint returns a populated response, revealing the victim customer's name, email, billing address, and payment details. No public POC has been identified at time of analysis, but the detailed exploitation mechanics in the CVE description are sufficient to construct an automated script. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Jul 31, 2026
Insecure Direct Object Reference in Fluent Forms for WordPress (versions up to and including 6.2.8) exposes other users' payment receipt data to unauthenticated remote attackers via a brute-forceable 'transaction' parameter. Because the transaction hash is constructed from observable or guessable inputs - submission ID, form ID, and creation timestamp - the effective brute-force space is bounded to approximately 900 candidates per second per (submission, form) pair, making unauthenticated enumeration of victim receipts containing name, email, billing address, order items, payment method, and payment status practically feasible. No public exploit has been identified at time of analysis and the vulnerability is not listed in the CISA KEV catalog; however, a patch is available in version 6.2.9.
RemediationAI
Upgrade Fluent Forms to version 6.2.9 or later; the fix is corroborated by the WordPress plugin repository changeset between tags 6.2.8 and 6.2.9 (https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?old_path=%2Ffluentform/tags/6.2.8&new_path=%2Ffluentform/tags/6.2.9) and the specific patch commit to BaseProcessor.php (changeset 3625751 at https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/3625751/fluentform/trunk/app/Modules/Payments/PaymentMethods/BaseProcessor.php). If immediate upgrade is not possible, disabling the payment integration feature entirely is the most effective compensating control, though it removes payment form functionality. WAF or rate-limiting rules targeting the transaction receipt endpoint (restricting to a small number of requests per IP per minute) can raise the cost of brute-force attempts but do not eliminate the IDOR root cause and can be bypassed with IP rotation. Wordfence paid-tier customers should verify that the corresponding firewall rule is active; see the advisory URL above.
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
Fluent Forms (CPE: cpe:2.3:a:wpmanageninja:fluent_forms_-_customizable_contact_forms,_survey,_quiz,_&_conversational_form_builder:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*) is a WordPress form builder plugin that includes an integrated payment module. The vulnerability is rooted in CWE-639 (Authorization Through User-Controlled Key): the plugin exposes a 'transaction' parameter in payment receipt lookups without binding the resolved record to the authenticated session or verifying that the requesting party is the rightful owner. Affected code spans three files within the Payments module: BaseProcessor.php (payment processing logic), TransactionShortcodes.php (receipt rendering via shortcodes), and PaymentHandler.php (request routing). The transaction hash is not cryptographically random relative to its inputs - it is seeded with the submission ID, form ID, and creation timestamp, all of which are either surfaced in confirmation pages or constrained to a narrow time window, yielding a practically searchable space without any authenticated context.
Know when Fluent Forms Customizable Contact Forms Survey Quiz Conversational Form Builder 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:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Network-reachable, no auth, low complexity due to bounded brute-force; C:L because exposure is scoped to individual transaction records, not full component confidentiality loss.
Primary rating from Vendor (Wordfence).
CVSS VectorVendor: Wordfence
DescriptionCVE.org
The Fluent Forms - Customizable Contact Forms, Survey, Quiz, & Conversational Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 6.2.8 via the 'transaction' parameter due to missing validation on a user controlled key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to brute-force valid transaction hashes and view sensitive payment receipt data including customer name, email address, billing address, order items, payment method, and payment status belonging to other users. Because submission ID, form ID, and transaction creation time are either observable or guessable by an attacker, the effective brute-force space is bounded to approximately 900 candidates per second per (submission, form) pair, making exploitation practical without any prior authentication or account.
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
Authentication bypass attacks exploit flaws in the verification mechanisms that control access to systems and applications.
Insecure Direct Object Reference in the WordPress Fluent Forms plugin (versions through 6.2.0) allows authenticated user
Stored Cross-Site Scripting in the Fluent Forms WordPress plugin (all versions through 6.2.11) allows unauthenticated at
Stored cross-site scripting in the Fluent Forms plugin for WordPress (all versions through 6.2.7) lets unauthenticated a
Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) in Fluent Forms WordPress plugin versions up to 6.2.1 allows authenticated contributor
Incorrect authorization in the Fluent Forms WordPress plugin (versions up to and including 6.2.1) enables any authentica
Fluent Forms for WordPress (all versions up to and including 6.2.5) fails to verify that a user is authorized before per
Payment status manipulation in the Fluent Forms WordPress plugin (versions up to and including 6.1.21) allows unauthenti
Fluent Forms plugin for WordPress up to version 6.2.1 allows authenticated administrators to read arbitrary files readab
Reflected cross-site scripting in the Fluent Forms WordPress plugin (all versions up to and including 6.2.14) allows una
EUVD-2026-51517
GHSA-gx6f-fm4p-x72r
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
VulDB
Exploit-DB