WordPress Core is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in versions 4.7 through 7.1.3. This is due to predictable, web-accessible staging paths used during full-package core upgrades. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to execute code on the server during the upgrade window.
CVE-2026-119977
“▲” beside the score: it is higher than the CVSS score beside it.
Score elevated to 9.0 because this CVE is listed on the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2026-11-03), indicating real-world exploitation has been confirmed by US federal agencies. A secondary CVSS source baseline 8.1 retained for reference (NVD's own analysis pending). The 9.0 is the floor for confirmed exploitation, not an impact rating: this CVE's impact severity (EG Severity) is CVSS 8.1 HIGH under GitHub Security Advisory CVSS. Confidence: HIGH.
Also known asEUVD-2026-114575 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD
- 3 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running an affected version — derived from Shodan data (© Shodan); a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open
- Actively exploited in the wild (CISA-KEV) — the reason this is sooner than the SSVC decision on this page at low or medium mission impact
A fix is available — apply it.
3 internet-facing services (distinct ip:port) on record running a version that maps to CVE-2026-119977, in our KEV-Exposure radar’s Shodan-derived sample.
How it counts: every 12 hours, when Shodan query credits allow, the radar runs one Shodan query per tracked product, reads up to 100 ip:port services per query, and keeps a service when its banner version matches a CISA-KEV or high-EPSS CVE; a service is dropped when neither a search nor a Shodan InternetDB port re-check has refreshed it for 21 days. A re-check that finds the port still listed by Shodan InternetDB refreshes the service without re-reading the banner, so a patched service can stay counted while its port stays open. A count is a banner-version inference over a sample, not an exploit test and not an internet-wide census, and the unit is a service, not a machine: a machine answering on two ports counts twice.
- CVSS v3
- 8.1
- EG Score
- 9.0CRITICALhigh confidence
- EG Risk
- 76EG Risk 76/100
EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.
How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)Severity81% × 45%Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 8.1 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.Exploitation100% × 40%Fixed at 100% for a CISA KEV listing: EchelonGraph's rule.Automatability0% × 15%CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Attend at medium and Act at high mission impact.Exploitation active (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low, sooner than that at medium and as soon as possible at high mission impact. - EPSS PROB
- 1.2%
- EPSS %ILE
- 68th
- KEV
- ⚠ Exploited
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (9.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 9.0 is the CISA KEV floor for confirmed exploitation, not an impact rating: its impact severity (EG Severity) is CVSS 8.1 HIGH.
- EG Severity
- 8.1 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 1.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- CISA KEV and EG-KEV Tier 1 (exploited in the wild)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Attend at medium mission impactTrack at low, Attend at medium and Act at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 3 days & forensic triage if the affected system is publicly exposed; 14 days if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Attend at medium and Act at high mission impact.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low, sooner than that at medium and as soon as possible at high mission impact.
Exploitation active (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)3 days & forensic triage if the affected system is publicly exposed; 14 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV yes (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it
CISA required action“Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions, ensuring compliance with CISA’s BOD 26-04 Prioritizing Security Updates Based on Risk (see URL in Notes) guidance and CISA’s “Forensics Triage Requirements” (see URL in Notes). Follow applicable BOD 26-04 guidance for cloud services or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Stakeholders are responsible for evaluating each asset's internet exposure and ensuring adherence to BOD 26-04 patching guidelines.”
Quoted verbatim from CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. CISA directs it at US federal civilian executive branch agencies under Binding Operational Directive (BOD) 26-04, which replaced BOD 22-01 on 10 June 2026; it is not EchelonGraph's advice. CISA's notes: https://wordpress.org/news/2026/10/wordpress-7-1-4 · https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/wordpress-core/wordpress-core-470-713-unauthenticated-upgrade-window-staged-installer-remote-code-execution · https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/directives/bod-26-04-prioritizing-security-updates-based-risk · https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/directives/bod-26-04-implementation-guidance-prioritizing-security-updates-based-risk · https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-119977
Published
October 31, 2026
Last Modified
November 4, 2026
Advisory Details (2)
Auto-updated Nov 6, 2026Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog | CISA
Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog | CISA. Listed in CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog?field_cve=CVE-2026-119977Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-119977(1)
These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.
Affected Packages
(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| wordpress | 6.1.1+dfsg1-1 ... 7.1.4+dfsg1-1 (32 versions) |
| — |
Debian:13(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| wordpress | 6.8.1+dfsg1-1 ... 6.8.7+dfsg1-0+deb13u1 (6 versions) |
| — |
Debian:14(1)
| Package | Vulnerable range | Fix by version range | Dependents |
|---|---|---|---|
| wordpress | 6.8.1+dfsg1-1 ... 7.1.3+dfsg1-1 (11 versions) |
| — |
Weakness Classification(1)
MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.
Data Freshness Timeline
(refreshed 14× in last 7d / 32× in last 30d)
Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.
- 2026-11-12 17:15 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-12 17:15 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 68th percentile
- 2026-11-11 16:59 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-11 16:59 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-11 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 68th percentile
- 2026-11-10 16:44 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-10 16:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-10 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 68th percentile
- 2026-11-09 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 68th percentile
- 2026-11-09 16:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-08 16:57 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-08 16:57 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-08 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 67th percentile
- 2026-11-07 16:41 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-07 16:41 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-07 16:38 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 67th percentile
- 2026-11-06 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 67th percentile
- 2026-11-06 16:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-06 16:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-05 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.2% · 67th percentile
- 2026-11-05 16:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-05 16:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-05 13:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-05 13:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
Show 21 moreShow fewer
- 2026-11-04 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 1.0% · 63rd percentile
- 2026-11-04 13:10 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-04 05:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-03 21:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-03 21:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-03 21:26 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-03 21:01 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-03 21:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-03 20:48 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored▲ 0.90
- 2026-11-03 20:48 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-03 20:46 UTCCISA KEV update
- 2026-11-03 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-11-02 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-11-02 16:28 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-11-02 16:28 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-p6jj-qrp3-7m4g · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 8.1
- 2026-11-01 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-31 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.6% · 48th percentile
- 2026-10-31 07:02 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-114575 · Source: ENISA EUVD
- 2026-10-31 06:26 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
- 2026-10-31 05:39 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 8.1 HIGH
- 2026-10-31 05:38 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked
Publicly available exploits
(4 references)Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (4 GitHub PoCs). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.
- Open source ↗GitHub PoCBugStealers/CVE-2026-119977Published Nov 8, 2026
- GitHub PoCtc4dy/CVE-2026-119977-ToolkitPublished Nov 5, 2026
CVE-2026-119977 – WordPress Core Upgrade-Window RCE (CVSS 8.1) | Red/Blue Team Toolkit. Predictable staging dir takeover, wp-config.php promotion, Bait MySQL proof, WAF origin discovery, rate-limited race oracle, admin shell deploy, version triage. Async, CI-tested. Only ethical & authorized use, stay legal.
Open source ↗ - Open source ↗GitHub PoClysophavin18/CVE-2026-119977Published Nov 4, 2026
- Open source ↗GitHub PoCWorthes/CVE-2026-119977-WordPress-Upgrade-RCE-Bypasses-7.1.4Published Nov 4, 2026
Related CVEs(same product + same CWE)
Same product
10 shownDebian:12:wordpress
Frequently asked(6)
What is CVE-2026-119977?
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-119977 published?
Is CVE-2026-119977 actively exploited?
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-119977?
Which products are affected by CVE-2026-119977?
How do I remediate CVE-2026-119977?
Dependency Blast Radius
See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-119977
Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-119977?
EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.