Custom Post Type and Taxonomy GUI Manager <= 1.1 - Stored XSS via CSRF
The Custom Post Type and Taxonomy GUI Manager WordPress plugin through 1.1 does not have CSRF, and is lacking sanitising as well as escaping in some parameters, allowing attackers to make a logged in admin put Stored Cross-Site Scripting payloads via CSRF
- Published
- Apr 24, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 12th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-79
Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.
Report tools
Action score
19
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 19 / 40 · 4.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- proof of concept
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
Noroxi analysis
No Noroxi analysis for this record yet
We don't hand-write analysis for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerabilities in the database; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| custom post type and taxonomy gui manager project | custom post type and taxonomy gui manager | cpe:2.3:a:custom_post_type_and_taxonomy_gui_manager_project:custom_post_type_and_taxonomy_gui_manager |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- custom post type and taxonomy gui manager project custom post type and taxonomy gui managerup to 1.1 inclusive
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (WPScan). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Unknown Custom Post Type and Taxonomy GUI Manager
- up to and including 1.1affected
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- WPScancoordinator
- Shreya PohekarCodevigilant Projectfinder
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- Administrator privileges are required.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- low · data can be read
- Integrity
- low · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- High
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- Low
- Integrity impact
- Low
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-79 · Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
nvd-primary
Root cause
User content is inserted into the page as HTML. The browser interprets the content as code rather than data.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-79 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
commentEl.innerHTML = comment.body;Fixed
commentEl.textContent = comment.body;Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.