Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-22193 is a critical-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Gvectors Wpdiscuz. Its CVSS base score is 9.2 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 23th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
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.
CVE-2026-22193, published on 2026-03-13, is an SQL injection vulnerability (CWE-89) in the wpDiscuz WordPress plugin for versions prior to 7.6.47. The flaw exists in the getAllSubscriptions() function, where string parameters including email, activation_key, subscription_date, and imported_from lack proper quote escaping in SQL queries. This allows attackers to inject malicious SQL code, enabling manipulation of database queries and extraction of sensitive information.
The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.1 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H), indicating network accessibility with high attack complexity, no required privileges or user interaction, and unchanged scope. Remote attackers can exploit it to manipulate database operations, achieving high impacts on confidentiality through data extraction, as well as integrity and availability via query alterations such as data modification or denial of service.
Advisories recommend updating to wpDiscuz 7.6.47 or later to mitigate the issue. Additional details are available in the VulnCheck advisory at https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/wpdiscuz-before-sql-injection-in-getallsubscriptions and on the plugin's WordPress.org pages at https://wordpress.org/plugins/wpdiscuz/ and https://wordpress.org/plugins/wpdiscuz/#developers.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-11744
Vulnerability Data
wpDiscuz before 7.6.47 contains an SQL injection vulnerability in the getAllSubscriptions() function where string parameters lack proper quote escaping in SQL queries. Attackers can inject malicious SQL code through email, activation_key, subscription_date, and imported_from parameters to manipulate database queries and…
more
extract sensitive information.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover SQLi flaws before deployment but does not stop their introduction.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from reaching SQL query construction without neutralization.
Secure engineering principles require parameterized queries and input sanitization that structurally eliminate SQLi.
System monitoring can identify attempted SQLi exploitation via anomalous queries after the weakness exists.
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 target injection flaws during coding and review so largely prevent CWE-89 introduction, yet the single broad outcome leaves residual risk from incomplete neutralization techniques or missed edge cases.
Training raises developer awareness of SQLi risks and can reduce introduction likelihood (partial) but removes none of the actual coding flaw's risk by itself since technical neutralization is still required.
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.
The same secure-coding and static-analysis activities surface missing neutralization of SQL metacharacters before the system is accepted.
Early warnings and shared best-practice information help organizations apply the latest remediation techniques against SQL-injection vulnerabilities.
Threat-intelligence feeds that surface new SQL-injection campaigns enable rapid updates to query-construction defenses and detection signatures before exploitation occurs.
Secure-coding rules and security testing phases mandate the use of parameterized queries or equivalent escaping, preventing the construction of dynamic SQL statements from untrusted input.
Language-specific secure coding rules, peer review and SAST together prevent the construction of SQL statements from untrusted data without proper parameterization or escaping.