FKIE_CVE-2026-8610

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-05-20 02:16 - Updated: 2026-07-23 20:10
Summary
The TypeSquare Webfonts for ConoHa plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.4. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to modify the plugin's site-wide font settings, including the typesquare_auth option (fontThemeUseType), show_post_form, and typesquare_fonttheme, by submitting a POST request to any wp-admin page. For fontThemeUseType values 1 and 3, no nonce verification is performed either, meaning those branches are additionally exploitable via cross-site request forgery.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "TypeSquare Webfonts for ConoHa",
          "vendor": "conoha",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "2.0.4",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@wordfence.com"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "The TypeSquare Webfonts for ConoHa plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.4. This is due to the plugin not properly verifying that a user is authorized to perform an action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to modify the plugin\u0027s site-wide font settings, including the typesquare_auth option (fontThemeUseType), show_post_form, and typesquare_fonttheme, by submitting a POST request to any wp-admin page. For fontThemeUseType values 1 and 3, no nonce verification is performed either, meaning those branches are additionally exploitable via cross-site request forgery."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "El plugin TypeSquare Webfonts for ConoHa para WordPress es vulnerable a una omisi\u00f3n de autorizaci\u00f3n en todas las versiones hasta la 2.0.4, inclusive. Esto se debe a que el plugin no verifica correctamente que un usuario est\u00e1 autorizado para realizar una acci\u00f3n. Esto hace posible que atacantes autenticados, con acceso de nivel de suscriptor y superior, modifiquen la configuraci\u00f3n de fuente de todo el sitio del plugin, incluyendo la opci\u00f3n typesquare_auth (fontThemeUseType), show_post_form y typesquare_fonttheme, al enviar una petici\u00f3n POST a cualquier p\u00e1gina de wp-admin. Para los valores 1 y 3 de fontThemeUseType, tampoco se realiza ninguna verificaci\u00f3n de nonce, lo que significa que esas ramas son adicionalmente explotables a trav\u00e9s de falsificaci\u00f3n de petici\u00f3n en sitios cruzados."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-8610",
  "lastModified": "2026-07-23T20:10:00.130",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 4.3,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "integrityImpact": "LOW",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
        "impactScore": 1.4,
        "source": "security@wordfence.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-8610",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-05-20T13:03:16.157076Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-05-20T02:16:40.547",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/ts-webfonts-for-conoha/tags/2.0.4/inc/class/class.auth.php#L51"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/ts-webfonts-for-conoha/tags/2.0.4/typesquare-admin.php#L25"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/ts-webfonts-for-conoha/tags/2.0.4/typesquare-admin.php#L93"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/88002a25-6890-4f8b-8a11-239b59d56672?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@wordfence.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-862"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@wordfence.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…