Skip to main content

CVE-2026-119213wpmanageninja Fluent Support insecure direct object reference

Low priorityLow3.7EPSS not scored yet

CVE-2026-119213 is a insecure direct object reference in wpmanageninja Fluent Support, rated low (3.7 on CVSS 3.1).

Why this priority: Low severity, with no exploitation signal.

Published · Updated · NVD status: Deferred

What it is

Changing an identifier in a request reaches another user's records.

How it is reached

An attacker can exploit it over the network, without an account, and nobody has to click anything. Success also depends on conditions the attacker does not fully control.

What an attacker gains

The direct impact is limited: partial access to data or a partial outage. In practice, this kind of flaw lets an attacker reach data or actions their role should not allow.

Is it being exploited?

There is no public report of exploitation yet.

What to do

  1. No fixed version is listed yet. Find every place wpmanageninja Fluent Support runs, watch the references for a fix, and plan a replacement if it is no longer supported.
  2. While there is no fix, keep it off the internet or behind a VPN, allowlist or authenticating proxy.

Description from NVD

The Fluent Support – Helpdesk & Customer Support Ticket System plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthenticated modification of a linked customer's stored profile fields in versions up to, and including, 2.4.7 Its first-party Fluent Forms integration (FeedIntegration::notify()) opens a ticket from each public form submission and, for a logged-out submitter, resolves the submitted email to an existing WordPress account via get_user_by('email', ...) without verifying the submitter controls that address, then passes the attacker-supplied data to Customer::maybeCreateCustomer(). This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to overwrite a limited set of a registered customer's stored profile fields where an administrator has enabled a FluentSupport feed on a public form. The email address, role and status are never changed; first and last name are overwritten only when the target user has no name set in user meta; and other fields (title, address, city, state, zip, country) are writable only where an administrator has mapped them in the feed.

What this means for your architecture.

A CVE names a product. Whether it matters depends on where that product sits in your systems: what reaches it, which trust boundary it guards and what it can reach once compromised. Veriom maps your components, their relationships and your trust boundaries from your code, cloud and delivery evidence, so you can see where a component like this sits. The radar itself does not look at your systems.

Components it touches

  • WordPress sites and their plugins. Plugins run inside the site with its database access, and many sites are public.
  • Permission checks in APIs and admin surfaces. The flaw sits between one role or tenant and another.
  • Multi-tenant services. The flaw sits between one role or tenant and another.

Trust boundaries in play

  • Internet-facing entry points. No account is needed. Any instance reachable from outside your perimeter, through a load balancer, gateway, VPN or exposed admin port, is in scope.
  • Between one role or tenant and another. An attacker who crosses it can reach data or actions their role should not allow.

Questions to answer about your own systems

  • Where does wpmanageninja Fluent Support run in your systems, and at which version?
  • Which of those instances can be reached from the internet or partner networks?
  • What can it reach once compromised: which data stores, secrets and services?

Sources

  • CVE records and CVSS scores from the NVD CVE API. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
  • Exploitation status from CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
  • Exploit likelihood from FIRST’s Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS), refreshed daily.
  • Explanations are written by Veriom from fixed templates over each record’s data, not by a person reviewing each CVE. Descriptions are quoted from the records as published.