SureForms <= 2.5.2 - Unauthenticated Payment Amount Validation Bypass via 'form_id'
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- A ready-made attack module is public (Nuclei); exploiting it takes no special expertise.
- Public proof-of-concept code exists (Exploit-DB / GitHub); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1.1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 66.6% 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. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to CISA the attack is automatable: targets can be found by mass scanning.
- 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 SureForms – Contact Form, Payment Form & Other Custom Form Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Payment Amount Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.5.2. This is due to the create_payment_intent() function performing a payment validation solely based on the value of a user-controlled parameter. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to bypass configured form payment-amount validation and create underpriced payment/subscription intents by setting form_id to 0.
- Published
- Mar 27, 2026
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.1% · 66th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-20
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.1%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- yes
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · Wordfence
- 7.5
- 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 SureForms – Contact Form Builder, AI Forms, Payment Form, Survey & Quiz 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.
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 helpAffected 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.
brainstormforce SureForms – Contact Form, Payment Form & Other Custom Form Builder
- up to and including 2.5.2affected · semver
Same product
brainstormforce: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2025-14855SureForms <= 2.2.0 - Unauthenticated Stored Cross-Site Scripting28Monitor
- CVE-2025-12535SureForms <= 1.13.1 - Cross-Site Request Forgery Protection Bypass via Improper Nonce Distribution21Monitor
- CVE-2025-12536SureForms <= 1.13.1 - Missing Authorization to Unauthenticated Sensitive Information Exposure21Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-10489Sep 20, 2025 · SureForms – Drag and Drop Form Builder for WordPress <= 1.12.0 - Missing Authorization to Authenticated (Contributor+) Form Creation17Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-10732Oct 14, 2025 · SureForms – Drag and Drop Form Builder for WordPress <= 1.12.1 - Missing Authorization to Authenticated (Contributor+) Information Disclosure17Monitor
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
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.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Nuclei detection template | Nuclei template CVE-2026-4987 | — |
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.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
- Jack Pasfinder
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.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-20 · Improper Input ValidationCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
nvd-secondary
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)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Server Side Include (SSI) InjectionCAPEC-101likelihood: High · High
- Cross Zone ScriptingCAPEC-104likelihood: Medium · High
- Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-108likelihood: Low · Very High
- Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-109likelihood: Low · High
- SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-110likelihood: High · Very High
- Double EncodingCAPEC-120likelihood: Low · Medium
- Subverting Environment Variable ValuesCAPEC-13likelihood: High · Very High
ATT&CK techniques
- Obfuscated Files or InformationT1027
- Masquerading: Invalid Code SignatureT1036.001
- Steal Web Session CookieT1539
- Subvert Trust Controls: Code SigningT1553.002
- Impair Defenses:Impair Command History LoggingT1562.003
- Hijack Execution Flow:Dynamic Linker HijackingT1574.006
- Hijack Execution Flow:Path Interception by PATH Environment VariableT1574.007
Change log
No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.