Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessCraft malicious link with script in TCM_ErrorMessages param
-
DeliverySocial-engineer victim into clicking link
-
ExploitUnsanitized POST value reflected into page
-
ExecutionScript executes in victim browser
-
ImpactHijack session or act as victim
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 that a victim with access to the affected site be tricked into clicking an attacker-crafted link or submitting a request carrying a script payload in the 'TCM_ErrorMessages' POST parameter, which the plugin reflects into a page without sanitization or output escaping. No authentication is required of the attacker (PR:N), and default configurations of Tracking Code Manager ≤2.6.0 are affected - the plugin feature itself is the vulnerable sink. The key limiting factors are: mandatory user interaction (UI:R), and the reflected (non-persistent) nature of the flaw, meaning each victim must be individually lured rather than compromised by merely visiting a stored page. |
| Impact | This is a moderate-severity reflected XSS (CVSS 6.1, CWE-79) with a coherent set of signals pointing to real-but-limited risk. The CVSS vector AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R confirms a network-reachable, low-complexity, unauthenticated attack that nevertheless REQUIRES victim interaction (clicking a crafted link), which is the single largest mitigating factor and typical of reflected (non-stored) XSS. Scope is changed (S:C) because injected script executes in the victim's browser context outside the vulnerable component, with limited confidentiality and integrity impact (C:L/I:L) and no availability impact (A:N). No EPSS score, KEV listing, or public POC is present in the provided data, so there is no evidence of active exploitation or mass automation - the finding originates from Wordfence research rather than observed attacks. Net assessment: a legitimate issue to patch on exposed WordPress sites, but not an emergency priority in the absence of exploitation signals; reflected XSS requiring per-victim social engineering is rarely weaponized at scale compared to stored XSS or unauthenticated RCE. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An unauthenticated attacker crafts a malicious link (or auto-submitting form) that sends a POST request with a script payload in the 'TCM_ErrorMessages' parameter to a site running Tracking Code Manager ≤2.6.0. When a victim is socially engineered into clicking the link, the unsanitized value is reflected into the page and the script executes in the victim's browser, potentially stealing session cookies or performing actions as that user. No public exploit code was identified in the provided data, though the vulnerability mechanics are straightforward to reproduce. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Oct 15, 2026
Reflected cross-site scripting in the WordPress plugin Tracking Code Manager (Data443) affects all versions up to and including 2.6.0, allowing unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary script into a page by supplying a payload in the TCM_ErrorMessages POST parameter, which the plugin reflects without sanitization or output escaping. Exploitation requires the attacker to lure a victim into submitting a crafted request or clicking a specially crafted link (UI:R), so each target must be individually induced to trigger the payload rather than being compromised by simply browsing a poisoned page. No confirmed active exploitation (CISA KEV) and no public exploit code were identified at time of analysis, and no EPSS score was supplied; the flaw is rated moderate (CVSS 6.1) with the main risk being session or credential theft against authenticated site users who are tricked into interacting with the crafted request.
RemediationAI
No tagged patched release version was independently confirmed in the provided data; the upstream fix is reflected in Tracking Code Manager changeset 3633064, which modifies trunk/includes/classes/utils/Options.php to add sanitization/escaping, so treat this as an upstream fix available via commit/changeset rather than a verified vendor release number - administrators should update the plugin to the first version published after 2.6.0 (verify the exact version in the WordPress.org plugin repository or the Wordfence advisory at https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/8f7ee196-1151-4312-ac61-0bb6756850bb?source=cve) and re-check the installed version afterward, since WordPress will not silently upgrade a plugin that has not been released. If an immediate update is not possible, the strongest compensating control is to deactivate Tracking Code Manager until a fixed build is installed - the trade-off is loss of tracking-code functionality but complete removal of the vulnerable sink. Alternatively, deploy a WAF or virtual-patching layer (for example Wordfence's rules, which cover this plugin family) that blocks requests carrying script content in the TCM_ErrorMessages parameter; the trade-off is rule-maintenance overhead and possible false positives on legitimate administrative submissions. Because the flaw is reflected and requires a victim to submit the crafted request, restricting access to the plugin's option/error-handling endpoints to trusted administrators (IP allowlisting or HTTP authentication in front of wp-admin and admin-ajax paths) meaningfully reduces exposure but does not eliminate the risk if an administrator can still be socially engineered. Applying a restrictive Content-Security-Policy that disallows inline script execution provides defense in depth at the cost of potentially breaking legitimate plugin or theme scripts. Finally, remind site users not to follow unsolicited links or submit unexpected forms that target the site's administrative URLs, since user interaction is a mandatory precondition for exploitation.
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 issue is a classic CWE-79 improper neutralization of input during web page generation (cross-site scripting) in the WordPress plugin Tracking Code Manager, published by Data443 and identified by CPE cpe:2.3:a:data443:tracking_code_manager. The vulnerable sink is the plugin's error-message handling: the TCM_ErrorMessages POST parameter is accepted and echoed back into a generated page without adequate input sanitization or output escaping, as reflected by the upstream change to includes/classes/utils/Options.php. Because the payload is reflected rather than persisted, the attack surface is the request/response path reaching the plugin's options-handling code, not a stored database record. The CVSS vector CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N indicates a network-reachable flaw with no authentication required of the attacker (PR:N), low attack complexity, mandatory victim interaction, and a scope change (S:C) meaning the injected script executes in the context of the affected site's origin and can reach beyond the vulnerable component's own security scope. WordPress plugins of this type are frequently reachable through administrative option pages and AJAX-style handlers, so any deployment where Tracking Code Manager 2.6.0 or earlier is active and its options/error-handling endpoints are reachable should be considered exposed to the reflected payload.
Know when Tracking Code Manager 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:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Network-reachable unauthenticated reflected XSS (AV:N/PR:N) needing victim click (UI:R); script runs cross-context (S:C) with limited C/I and no availability impact.
Primary rating from Vendor (Wordfence).
CVSS VectorVendor: Wordfence
DescriptionCVE.org
The Tracking Code Manager plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Reflected Cross-Site Scripting via 'TCM_ErrorMessages' POST Parameter in all versions up to, and including, 2.6.0 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that execute if they can successfully trick a user into performing an action such as clicking on a link.
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.
More in Tracking Code Manager
View allThe Tracking Code Manager WordPress plugin before 2.3.0 does not sanitise and escape some of its settings, which could a
Cross-Site Request Forgery in the Tracking Code Manager WordPress plugin (versions up to and including 2.6.0) enables re
The Tracking Code Manager WordPress plugin before 2.4.0 does not sanitise and escape some of its metabox settings when o
EUVD-2026-101846
GHSA-7572-wgx4-m8rc
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
Vulnrichment
Exploit-DB