Security Resilience

CVE-2023-0558

Access Control in Contentstudio ≤ 1.2.6

Public PoCAccess Control
Published
27 January 2023
Modified
08 April 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 8.2
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0088 59th percentile
Risk Priority 64 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). EPSS scores by FIRST (EPSS SIG), generated by Empirical Security. Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-0558 is a high-severity Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) vulnerability in Contentstudio. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 41% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

The ContentStudio plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to authorization bypass due to an unsecure token check that is susceptible to type juggling in versions up to, and including, 1.2.5. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to execute functions intended…

more

for use by users with proper API keys.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1565 Data Manipulation Impact
Adversaries may insert, delete, or manipulate data in order to influence external outcomes or hide activity, thus threatening the integrity of the data.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-0556Same product: Contentstudio Contentstudio
CVE-2023-0557Same product: Contentstudio Contentstudio
CVE-2026-92469Shared CWE-639
CVE-2023-51502Shared CWE-639
CVE-2026-111684Shared CWE-639
CVE-2026-43917Shared CWE-639
CVE-2026-57665Shared CWE-639
CVE-2024-33373Shared CWE-639
CVE-2025-7347Shared CWE-639
CVE-2024-8613Shared CWE-639

Affected Assets

contentstudio
contentstudio
≤ 1.2.6

Mitigating Controls

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

addresses: CWE-639

Per-request decision making makes it harder to bypass authorization using user-controlled keys without proper validation in the decision process.

addresses: CWE-639

Consistent enforcement of approved authorizations makes bypassing via user-controlled keys ineffective.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.AA-05 full match
blocks

Enforcing authorization policy and least privilege directly blocks user-controlled key tampering that bypasses access checks.

PR.IR-01 mostly match
blocks

Logical access controls prevent unauthorized data access that results from missing authorization checks on object references.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

removes

A.8.3 mandates that access to information be restricted based on user identity and permissions, directly addressing the missing authorization check that defines CWE-639; when applied, it removes the vulnerability by requiring that such checks be implemented.

blocks

A.5.15 directly requires defining and implementing access control rules (including authorization, need-to-know, role-based restrictions, formal requests, and consistency with classification) that stop one user from reaching another's data via a tampered key; the bounded remainder is dynamic or application-specific authorization logic (cross-referenced to 8.26) that may still allow bypass if those downstream rules are flawed.

finds

Security testing can detect missing authorization checks but does not prevent the weakness in production.

blocks

Managing access rights includes ensuring users can only access their own records and not bypass authorization by altering identifiers.

prevents

Secure coding practices reduce the likelihood of missing authorization checks but do not guarantee their presence at runtime.

References