NVD / CVE Program· CNA Wordfence

CVE-2026-10795: UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin <= 1.26.4 - Unauthenticated Authentication Bypass via UpdraftCentral udrpc

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 33/100)

A ready-made attack module is public (Nuclei); exploiting it takes no special expertise.
Public proof-of-concept code exists (GitHub); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 4.3% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 91.1% of all records.
Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
No fixed version is recorded, but the references include a patch (commit or PR) link.

Low priority for now. See the fix and affected versions sections below.

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 UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.26.4 via the UpdraftPlus_Remote_Communications_V2::wp_loaded function. This is due to insufficient validation of the remote communications message format, where signature verification can be bypassed and unchecked decryption return values collapse to a predictable all-zero encryption key. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to forge arbitrary RPC commands and run them as the connected administrator, such as uploading and activating a malicious plugin, which ultimately leads to remote code execution.

HighCVSS 8.1 · v3.1—Proof of concept No fix recorded

Published: Jun 11, 2026
Updated: Jul 23, 2026
EPSS: 4.3% · 91th percentile
CWE: CWE-347

Report tools

JSON

Action score

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS: 32 / 40 · 8.1 / 10
CISA KEV: 0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS: 1 / 30 · 4.3%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical impact: total

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD: —
CNA · Wordfence: 8.1; NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

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

Is UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin 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.

—

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.

davidanderson UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin
- up to and including 1.26.4affected · semver

Same product

davidanderson: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

CVE-2024-10957UpdraftPlus: WP Backup & Migration Plugin 1.23.8 - 1.24.11 - Unauthenticated PHP Object Injection
35Monitor
CVE-2025-0215UpdraftPlus - Backup/Restore <= 1.24.12 - 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

Proof of concept available

A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.

Evidence

Nuclei detection template ×1
Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub ×3

Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.

Public exploit evidence
Source	Kind	Date
Nuclei detection template	Nuclei template CVE-2026-10795	—
Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub	stars:2	2026-06-11
Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub	stars:1	2026-06-15
Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub	stars:0	2026-09-08

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.

First PoCJun 11, 2026same day
PublishedJun 11, 2026
TodayOct 30, 2026+141 d

No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

plugins.trac.wordpress.orgchangeset 3561938

Credits

All researchers

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

XU WEI TINGfinder

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.
No account or password is required.
No user action is required.
Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.

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: High
Privileges required: None
User interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality impact: High
Integrity impact: High
Availability impact: High

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-347 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

CVSS vector

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

nvd-secondary

Root cause

The verifier takes the algorithm to verify with from the token’s own header. Untrusted data ends up deciding its own verification rule.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-347 class

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

Vulnerable

1const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey);

Fixed

1const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey, {
2  algorithms: ["RS256"],
3  issuer: "https://id.example.com",
4  audience: "portal",
5});

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.

References

plugins.svn.wordpress.org/updraftplus/tags/1.26.4/vendor/team-updraft/common-libs/src/updraft-rpc/class-udrpc.php

Show all references (3 more)

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records