CVE-2022-1463· NVD / CVE Program· CNA Wordfence

Booking Calendar <= 9.1 - PHP Object Injection via Shortcode

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 36/100)

The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1.7% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 77.2% of all records.
Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.

Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

The Booking Calendar plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to PHP Object Injection via the [bookingflextimeline] shortcode in versions up to, and including, 9.1. This could be exploited by subscriber-level users and above to call arbitrary PHP objects on a vulnerable site.

HighCVSS 8.8 · v3.1—No exploit No fix recorded

Deserialization

Published: May 10, 2022
Updated: Jun 17, 2026
EPSS: 1.7% · 77th percentile
CWE: CWE-502

Report tools

JSON

Action score

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS: 35 / 40 · 8.8 / 10
CISA KEV: 0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS: 1 / 30 · 1.7%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical impact: total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD: 8.8
CNA · Wordfence: 8.8; agree

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Is Booking Calendar on your site?

WP Lens reads your site's plugin, theme and WordPress versions from the outside and matches them to known vulnerabilities. Works without an account.

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

Vendor	Product	CPE
booking calendar project	booking calendar	cpe:2.3:a:booking_calendar_project:booking_calendar

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

booking calendar project booking calendarup to 9.1 inclusive

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (Wordfence). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

wpdevelop Booking Calendar
- 9.1 and later · up to and including 9.1affected

Same product

booking calendar project: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

CVE-2018-20556SQL injection vulnerability in Booking Calendar plugin 8.4.3 for WordPress allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the
41Plan
CVE-2018-5673An issue was discovered in the booking-calendar plugin 2.1.7 for WordPress.
35Monitor
CVE-2023-36384WordPress Booking Calendar Contact Form Plugin <= 1.2.40 is vulnerable to Cross Site Scripting (XSS)
24Monitor

Published before and after this one in the same product

← EarlierCVE-2018-5671Jan 12, 2018 · An issue was discovered in the booking-calendar plugin 2.1.7 for WordPress.
19Monitor
← EarlierCVE-2018-5672Jan 12, 2018 · An issue was discovered in the booking-calendar plugin 2.1.7 for WordPress.
19Monitor
← EarlierCVE-2021-25040Jan 3, 2022 · Booking Calendar < 8.9.2 - Reflected Cross-Site Scripting
24Monitor

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.

EPSS, last 120 days

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 researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

Ramuel Gall, Wordfence

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.
A low-privileged account is enough.
No user action is required.
No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality: high · data can be read
Integrity: high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability: high · the service can be disrupted

Attack vector: Network
Attack complexity: Low
Privileges required: Low
User interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality impact: High
Integrity impact: High
Availability impact: High

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

nvd-primary

Root cause

Data received over the network is deserialized into the language’s native object format without verifying its source. Code paths inside the object can be triggered during deserialization.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-502 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

python

1payload = sock.recv(65536)
2job = pickle.loads(payload)

Fixed

python

1payload = sock.recv(65536)
2if not hmac.compare_digest(sign(payload), header_sig):
3    raise PermissionError("invalid signature")
4job = JobSchema.validate(json.loads(payload))

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)

Object InjectionCAPEC-586likelihood: Medium · High

ATT&CK techniques

—

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

All records