Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-60137 is a medium-severity SQL Injection (CWE-89) vulnerability in Wordpress Wordpress. Its CVSS base score is 5.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 0.5% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-45279
Vulnerability Data
WordPress 6.8.x before 6.8.6, 6.9.x before 6.9.5, and 7.0.x before 7.0.2 does not properly sanitise the author__not_in parameter of WP_Query, which could allow SQL Injection when a plugin or theme passes untrusted input to the parameter.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 21 July 2026
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
SQL injection in public-facing WordPress WP_Query parameter directly enables exploitation of the web application.
Likely ATT&CK TechniquesAI
Techniques this vulnerability likely enables, inferred from its description, weakness type, and attributed-actor tradecraft. Confidence is per-technique.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires validation and sanitization of untrusted input to WP_Query parameters, preventing the SQL injection via author__not_in.
Mandates timely application of patches that correct the missing sanitization in WP_Query for the listed WordPress versions.
Enables monitoring and analysis of database queries or application behavior to identify anomalous SQL patterns resulting from the injection.
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.