Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-8512 is a critical-severity Eval Injection (CWE-95) vulnerability in Wordpress (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.1 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique JavaScript (T1059.007); ranked in the top 41% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — 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.
The W3SPEEDSTER plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to remote code execution in all versions through 7.26. The flaw exists in the hookBeforeStartOptimization() function, which passes attacker-controlled input from the 'script' parameter directly to eval(), enabling arbitrary PHP execution. The issue is tracked as CWE-95 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.1.
Authenticated users with Administrator or higher privileges can exploit the vulnerability over the network to run code on the underlying server, achieving full compromise of the affected WordPress installation.
Public references include a Wordfence advisory and a changeset in the WordPress plugin repository that address the vulnerable code path, indicating an update beyond version 7.26 is available for remediation.
The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.2108 with no material increase observed after disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-49230
Vulnerability Data
The W3SPEEDSTER plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in all versions up to, and including, 7.26 via the 'script' parameter of the hookBeforeStartOptimization() function. This is due to the plugin passing user supplied input to eval(). This…
more
makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Administrator-level access and above, to execute code on the server.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and code analysis can discover eval-injection flaws but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation explicitly requires neutralizing untrusted data before it reaches dynamic evaluation constructs such as eval.
Secure-development standards and tools can mandate safe coding patterns that avoid unsafe dynamic evaluation.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input neutralization and avoidance of unsafe dynamic evaluation.
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.
Security testing in development can detect eval injection vulnerabilities before deployment.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and safe coding practices that directly prevent eval injection.
Application security requirements include rules against dynamic code execution of untrusted input.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe dynamic evaluation constructs.
Secure coding explicitly requires neutralization of input before dynamic evaluation, directly mitigating eval injection.
Separation of environments limits the blast radius if eval injection occurs in non-production.