Security Resilience

CVE-2026-75977

Published
26 August 2026
Modified
26 August 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 8.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0086 58th percentile
Risk Priority 65 floored blend · peak EPSS

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

Summary

CVE-2026-75977 is a high-severity Improper Privilege Management (CWE-269) vulnerability in Wordpress (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).

Operationally, ranked in the top 42% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-2 (Account Management) and AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

The Mang Board WP plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Missing Authorization via Authentication Cookie Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.3.7. This is due to flawed HMAC generation in the mbw_get_hash_key() function that uses the current user's…

more

identity instead of the cookie username parameter when a WordPress user is logged in, combined with insufficient validation in mbw_validate_auth_cookie(). This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to forge administrator authentication cookies and change administrator passwords to achieve complete site takeover.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-29056Shared CWE-269
CVE-2026-62355Shared CWE-269
CVE-2026-19883Shared CWE-269
CVE-2025-6758Shared CWE-269
CVE-2025-15403Shared CWE-269
CVE-2024-35430Shared CWE-269
CVE-2026-61061Shared CWE-269
CVE-2025-27846Shared CWE-269
CVE-2024-43403Shared CWE-269
CVE-2026-92062Shared CWE-269

Affected Assets

Wordpress
—
inferred from references and description; NVD did not file a CPE for this CVE

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Account management directly governs assignment and tracking of privileges so proper implementation stops the weakness from being introduced.

Requiring explicit access-control decisions ensures privileges are evaluated rather than assumed or omitted.

Access enforcement applies the correct privilege checks at every request, structurally preventing unintended spheres of control.

Separation of duties constrains how privileges may be assigned, reducing the chance of overly broad actor control.

Least privilege is the direct countermeasure to improper privilege management; implementing it eliminates the root cause.

Binding security attributes to subjects/objects supplies the mechanism needed to track and enforce privileges correctly.

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.

blocks

A.5.15 directly mandates determining access requirements, defining/enforcing topic-specific access control policy, assigning rights/restrictions by entity/role, consistency with classification, need-to-know, privileged access restrictions, segregation, formal authorization, and dynamic rules — which stops most improper privilege management from being exploitable; bounded remainder is flawed implementation of those rules (e.g. incorrect mapping or enforcement bugs).

blocks

A.5.18 directly governs the provisioning, review, modification and timely revocation of access rights (including for role changes, termination and privilege levels), which stops most improper privilege spheres from being exploitable even if the assignment flaw exists; the bounded remainder is flaws in the underlying enforcement mechanism itself (e.g. AC-3/A.8.3)

blocks

A.8.2 directly controls the identification, allocation, review, expiry, temporary use, and separation of privileged rights per policy, which prevents most improper privilege management (CWE-269) by design; the bounded remainder is flawed tracking/checking logic inside the product's own enforcement code (the AC-3 slice of 269).

blocks

A.8.3 directly restricts access per policies (config mechanisms, per-user/group rights, isolation, dynamic techniques, auth/credential enforcement), which stops exploitation of most improper privilege management cases even if the assignment/tracking flaw remains; named remainder exists for non-access-control privilege errors (e.g. pure assignment bugs outside enforcement).

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.

References