CVE-2026-13700
CVE-2026-13700 — WooMS <= 9.14 - Unauthenticated Server-Side Request Forgery and Sensitive Information Disclosure
The WooMS WordPress plugin through 9.14 does not validate a user-supplied URL before using it in a server-side request and attaches stored third-party integration credentials to every such request, allowing unauthenticated attackers to perform Server-Side Request Forgery and to disclose the configured integration credentials when the relevant data-sync feature is enabled.
Published Updated Sources: NVD, Unknown (CNA), GitHub, GitHub Security Advisory, SOCRadar CTI
Triage
Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.
Exploitation
Exploit code
public exploit, none observed
EPSS
0%
ahead of 0% of scored CVEs
CVSS base
Unscored
no source published a base score
Remediation
The vendor's own words where we have them.
Upgrade WooMS to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.
First 24 hours
Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.
- Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
- Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
- Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.
Affected scope
Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unknown | WooMS | 0 to <= 9.14 | Vulnerable |
Weakness & attack patterns
- CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
Inferred from the weakness class — not observed against this CVE.
Public exploit
Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.
Repositories
10
Detection
Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.
- Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 10 public PoC repositories were reported.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.
- 2026
Initial · CVE published
Aug 17, 2026 · NVD
Added · GHSA-3wqr-pcph-pf9p published (unknown)
Aug 17, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory
Source activity
Readings a source repeats on a schedule, counted rather than listed.
- 1×CVE modified by NIST, Description, Published, Modified, LinkAug 17, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
References
3 on the record
- wpscan.com/vulnerability/dd9e51a2-43fb-46de-8e59-2d9611fcc4ff/
Vendor Advisory, NIST
- nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-13700
NVD
- github.com/advisories/GHSA-3wqr-pcph-pf9p
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
Elsewhere on this site
Not in any source we poll
Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.
- No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
- No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
- No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1
What should defenders know first?
CVE-2026-13700 is WooMS <= 9.14 - Unauthenticated Server-Side Request Forgery and Sensitive Information Disclosure, a unscored vulnerability affecting WooMS from Unknown. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-13700. Public exploit evidence is: 10 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS null describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.