AFI Plugin up to 1.99.x on WordPress Setting cross site scripting

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability was found in AFI Plugin up to 1.99.x on WordPress. It has been classified as problematic. This affects an unknown part of the component Setting Handler. The manipulation leads to cross site scripting. This vulnerability is documented as CVE-2024-13123. The attack can be initiated remotely. There is not any exploit available. Upgrading the affected component is recommended.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in AFI Plugin up to 1.99.x on WordPress. This issue affects an unknown code block of the component Setting Handler. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cross site scripting vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-79. The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users. Impacted is integrity. The summary by CVE is:

The AFI WordPress plugin before 1.100.0 does not sanitise and escape some of its settings, which could allow high privilege users such as admin to perform Stored Cross-Site Scripting attacks even when the unfiltered_html capability is disallowed (for example in multisite setup).

The weakness was released by Bob Matyas. The advisory is shared at wpscan.com. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2024-13123 since 01/01/2025. The exploitation is known to be easy. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploitation needs additional levels of successful authentication. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. MITRE ATT&CK project uses the attack technique T1059.007 for this issue.

Upgrading to version 1.100.0 eliminates this vulnerability.

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Type

• WordPress Plugin

Name

• AFI Plugin

Version

• 1.0
• 1.1
• 1.2
• 1.3
• 1.4
• 1.5
• 1.6
• 1.7
• 1.8
• 1.9
• 1.10
• 1.11
• 1.12
• 1.13
• 1.14
• 1.15
• 1.16
• 1.17
• 1.18
• 1.19
• 1.20
• 1.21
• 1.22
• 1.23
• 1.24
• 1.25
• 1.26
• 1.27
• 1.28
• 1.29
• 1.30
• 1.31
• 1.32
• 1.33
• 1.34
• 1.35
• 1.36
• 1.37
• 1.38
• 1.39
• 1.40
• 1.41
• 1.42
• 1.43
• 1.44
• 1.45
• 1.46
• 1.47
• 1.48
• 1.49
• 1.50
• 1.51
• 1.52
• 1.53
• 1.54
• 1.55
• 1.56
• 1.57
• 1.58
• 1.59
• 1.60
• 1.61
• 1.62
• 1.63
• 1.64
• 1.65
• 1.66
• 1.67
• 1.68
• 1.69
• 1.70
• 1.71
• 1.72
• 1.73
• 1.74
• 1.75
• 1.76
• 1.77
• 1.78
• 1.79
• 1.80
• 1.81
• 1.82
• 1.83
• 1.84
• 1.85
• 1.86
• 1.87
• 1.88
• 1.89
• 1.90
• 1.91
• 1.92
• 1.93
• 1.94
• 1.95
• 1.96
• 1.97
• 1.98
• 1.99

CPE 2.3info

• 🔍
• 🔍
• 🔍

CPE 2.2info

• 🔍
• 🔍
• 🔍

CVSSv4info

CVSSv3info

CVSSv2info

Exploitinginfo

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Countermeasuresinfo

Timelineinfo

Sourcesinfo

Entryinfo

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion