What is CVE-2026-18387?

CVE-2026-18387 is Groundhogg <= 4.5.14 - Authenticated (Vendor+) SQL Injection via 'tag_query' Parameter. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Injection mapped to CWE-89 SQL Injection.

Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-18387. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-18387 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

2 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS, database audit logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-18387 using CVSS 6.5, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

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. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

mediumInjectionpublic exploit

CVE-2026-18387

CVE-2026-18387 — Groundhogg <= 4.5.14 - Authenticated (Vendor+) SQL Injection via 'tag_query' Parameter

Q: Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Q: Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-18387. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

Q: Is it in CISA KEV?

No. CVE-2026-18387 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Q: Is there a public exploit?

2 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

Q: How can defenders detect it?

Start with web/proxy/WAF logs, application logs, network IDS/IPS, database audit logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

Q: How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-18387 using CVSS 6.5, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Q: Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Q: Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

Q: What should be done in the next 24 hours?

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. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

The Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to generic SQL Injection via the 'tag_query' parameter in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.14 due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with vendor-level access and above, to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database. Exploitation requires the attacker to trigger the vulnerable Legacy_Contact_Query code path by submitting an unknown filter type (e.g. filters[0][0][type]=force_fallback), which causes a FilterException that dispatches execution away from the modern query handler.

Published Aug 15, 2026Updated Aug 15, 2026Sources: NVD, trainingbusinesspros (CNA), GitHub, 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

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

trainingbusinesspros

Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation

CVSS base

6.5

medium

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation 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
trainingbusinesspros	Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation	0 to <= 4.5.14	Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

None

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

None

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

Low

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
6.5	CVSS 3.1	medium	2.8	3.6	NVD, trainingbusinesspros (CNA)

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-89 · Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection')

Read Application Data
Bypass Protection Mechanism
Modify Application Data

Mitigation: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using persistence layers such as Hibernate or Enterprise Java Beans, which can provide significant protection against SQL injection if used properly.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-89SQL Injection

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-470 · Expanding Control over the Operating System from the DatabaseCAPEC-109 · Object Relational Mapping InjectionCAPEC-110 · SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter TamperingCAPEC-7 · Blind SQL InjectionCAPEC-108 · Command Line Execution through SQL InjectionCAPEC-66 · SQL Injection

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation.
Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 2 public PoC repositories were reported.

web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPSdatabase audit logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Added · CVSS 3.1 6.5 (AV:N)
Aug 15, 2026 · NVD
Initial · CVE published
Aug 15, 2026 · NVD
Reported · Disclosed
Aug 14, 2026 · trainingbusinesspros
Reported · Vendor Notified
Jul 30, 2026 · trainingbusinesspros

References

12 on the record

plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.14/api/v4/contacts-api.php#L230
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.14/includes/contact-query.php#L2599
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.14/includes/legacy-contact-query.php#L548
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.14/includes/tag-query.php#L393
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.14/includes/tag-query.php#L415
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.6/api/v4/contacts-api.php#L230
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.6/includes/contact-query.php#L2599
Vendor Advisory
plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/groundhogg/tags/4.5.6/includes/legacy-contact-query.php#L548
Vendor Advisory

Elsewhere on this site

trainingbusinessprosevery CVE for this vendor
Injectionsame class
CWE-89other pages naming this weakness

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-2026-18387 is Groundhogg <= 4.5.14 - Authenticated (Vendor+) SQL Injection via 'tag_query' Parameter, a medium vulnerability affecting Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation from trainingbusinesspros. 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-2026-18387. Public exploit evidence is: 2 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 6.5 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.