Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-13528 is a high-severity Improper Authentication (CWE-287) vulnerability in Wpfactory Customer Email Verification For Woocommerce. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 40th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to IA-2 (Identification and Authentication (Organizational Users)) and IA-3 (Device Identification and Authentication) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2024-13528 is an authentication bypass vulnerability affecting the Customer Email Verification for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress in all versions up to and including 2.9.5. The issue stems from a shortcode that generates a confirmation link using a placeholder email address, enabling improper verification logic (CWE-287). It has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating high potential impact with low privileges required but high attack complexity.
Authenticated attackers with Contributor-level access or higher can exploit this vulnerability by generating a verification link for any unverified user account, allowing them to log in as that user. Exploitation requires the 'Fine tune placement' option to be enabled in the plugin settings, limiting the attack surface to configurations where this feature is active. Successful exploitation grants full access to the targeted account, potentially leading to unauthorized data access, modification, or other administrative actions depending on the site's roles.
Wordfence's threat intelligence advisory details the vulnerability and recommends updating the plugin to a patched version beyond 2.9.5. A fix is available in WordPress plugin changeset 3238136, which addresses the shortcode logic in class-alg-wc-ev-emails.php (previously vulnerable at line 151 in tag 2.9.2). Security practitioners should verify plugin configurations, disable unnecessary shortcodes if possible, and prioritize updates for WooCommerce sites with email verification enabled.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-51654
Vulnerability Data
The Customer Email Verification for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass in all versions up to, and including, 2.9.5. This is due to the presence of a shortcode that will generate a confirmation link with a placeholder…
more
email. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to generate a verification link for any unverified user and log into the account. The 'Fine tune placement' option must be enabled in the plugin settings in order to exploit the vulnerability.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Mandates unique identification and authentication of organizational users before access, directly stopping improper authentication.
Requires unique identification and authentication of devices before establishing connections, preventing unauthenticated device claims.
Mandates unique identification and authentication of non-organizational users, directly addressing the weakness for external actors.
Manages authenticators with verification and secure distribution, reducing opportunities for improper authentication.
Enforces access only after approved authorizations, which presupposes correct authentication has occurred.
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.
Mandating segregated approval and oversight for non-human identities reduces the chance that weak or orphaned credentials can be exploited for unauthorized authentication.
A.5.17 directly mandates generation of non-guessable unique secrets, secure transmission, immediate change of defaults/temporary creds, strong password enforcement, no-reuse, and compromise response, which stops most improper-authentication exploits at source; the bounded remainder is non-password authentication methods and sufficiency-of-proof cases (e.g. IA-2/IA-5 enhancements) left to other controls.
Security requirements specified early and verified through testing drive the consistent implementation of authentication mechanisms, decreasing the likelihood that authentication steps are omitted or incorrectly applied.
A.8.26 explicitly requires identifying and addressing authentication-related requirements (including level of trust in identity via 8.5 and 5.17) as part of application development or acquisition, which prevents a slice of CWE-287 but leaves the dominant sufficiency-of-proof aspects (IA-2/IA-5) and many implementation defects untouched.
A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (least privilege, default-deny, never-trust/always-verify, MFA, end-to-end encryption of requests, distrust-external-input, secure session control, and explicit authentication/authorization in every layer), which directly stops most improper-authentication flaws from being exploitable; the bounded remainder is insufficient-proof cases that live only in the strength or correctness of the credential itself (IA-5/IA-2 territory).
A.8.5 directly mandates appropriate-strength authentication techniques, MFA for critical systems, protected log-on procedures, brute-force resistance, no cleartext passwords/transmission, and session controls that stop exploitation of insufficient proof of identity; the bounded remainder is cases where the chosen technique itself is flawed or insufficiently implemented (e.g. weak biometrics without fallback).
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.