Stored XSS via forged privileged-user request
Published Nov 14, 2024 · Updated Apr 28, 2026
Cross-site request forgery in Ciprian Popescu W3P SEO before 1.8.6 allows remote attackers to store scripts via a forged request. Neither the CNA record nor Patchstack identifies the affected handler or parameter, or the exact missing validation that admits the script payload. Exploitation requires a logged-in privileged user to act on attacker-controlled content; the stored script then executes with that viewer's browser privileges.
Summary
What happened
Cross-site request forgery in Ciprian Popescu W3P SEO before 1.8.6 allows remote attackers to store scripts via a forged request. Neither the CNA record nor Patchstack identifies the affected handler or parameter, or the exact missing validation that admits the script payload. Exploitation requires a logged-in privileged user to act on attacker-controlled content; the stored script then executes with that viewer's browser privileges.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2024-51684
- Published
- Nov 14, 2024
- Updated
- Apr 28, 2026
- Vendor
- Ciprian Popescu
- Product
- W3P SEO
- Classifications
- CWE-352, CAPEC-592, T1189
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Nov 14, 2024CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Apr 28, 2026Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=0 <=1.8.6 changes=[{"at":"1.8.6","status":"unaffected"}]
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
No public exploit references are available in this record.
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo