Live Active security incident? Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2026-9722: Laiser Tag <= 1.2.5 - Cross-Site Request Forgery to Plugin Settings Update via Settings Form

The Laiser Tag plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.2.5. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the addOptionsPageFields function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to update the plugin's settings, including the API key, tag blacklist, relevance threshold, batch size, and tagging toggles, via a forged request via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.

MediumCVSS 4.3Not KEV-listed Updated
Discuss exposure Back to CVEs
Glexia's Take moderate

Analyst readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

This issue lets an outside attacker change Laiser Tag plugin settings if they can trick a WordPress administrator into taking an action. The changed settings include sensitive and operational values such as the API key, tag blacklist, thresholds, batch size, and tagging toggles. The provided sources do not show active exploitation.

Executive priority

Treat this as a moderate-priority WordPress configuration integrity risk. It does not provide direct data theft or site takeover in the provided sources, but it can alter tagging behavior and plugin credentials if an administrator is tricked.

Technical view

CVE-2026-9722 is a CSRF flaw in the WordPress Laiser Tag plugin through version 1.2.5, attributed to missing or incorrect nonce validation in addOptionsPageFields. Impact is integrity-only and requires administrator user interaction. CVSS 3.1 is 4.3, with network attack vector, low complexity, no privileges, and required user interaction.

Likely exposure

Exposure is limited to WordPress sites with Laiser Tag installed, reportedly at versions up to and including 1.2.5. The structured affected metadata in the bundle appears inconsistent, so confirm exposure against installed plugin version and vendor or Wordfence advisory details.

Exploitation context

The attacker does not need an account, but must induce a site administrator to perform an action that submits a forged settings request. The provided sources do not indicate CISA KEV listing or active exploitation in the wild.

Researcher notes

The key technical issue is missing or incorrect nonce validation around settings updates. Source evidence points to the settings form and addOptionsPageFields handling. Avoid assuming a patch exists from the bundle alone; the affected-version metadata also appears inconsistent with the prose description.

Mitigation direction

  • Inventory WordPress sites for the Laiser Tag plugin and record installed versions.
  • Check Wordfence, WordPress plugin, and vendor guidance for a fixed release or official mitigation.
  • Update the plugin when a fixed version is confirmed by trusted vendor guidance.
  • Disable or remove the plugin where it is not business-critical until fixed guidance is available.
  • Review Laiser Tag settings for unexpected API key or tagging configuration changes.

Validation and detection

  • Confirm whether each WordPress site has Laiser Tag installed and enabled.
  • Compare installed versions with the reported affected range through 1.2.5.
  • Review plugin settings for unauthorized API key, blacklist, threshold, batch size, or toggle changes.
  • Check administrative activity and recent configuration changes around the publication date.
  • Verify any remediation against vendor or Wordfence guidance before closing the finding.
Prepared
Confidence
medium
Sources
6

Public sources used

Based on public source material and reviewed before publication.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

cwe · medium confidence lookup

CWE-352: User-session and phishing behavior lookup

Client-side and session-facing weaknesses should be reviewed alongside initial-access and user-execution behaviors. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2026-9722 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profile CVE Program record
Severity
Medium
CVSS
4.3 (3.1)
Known Exploited
No
Published

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

1 CVSS vectors
4 Timeline events
1 ADP providers
4 Source links

SSVC decision data

CISA-ADP CISA Coordinator
Timestamp
Version
2.0.3
Exploitation: noneAutomatable: noTechnical Impact: partial

CVSS vector scores

1 official score

We collect every scored CVSS vector available in the official CNA and ADP containers. When more than one version is present, the table keeps the source vectors side by side instead of collapsing them into the highest score.

Score Version Severity Vector Exploit Impact Source
4.3 CVSS 3.1 Medium CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N 2.8 1.4 Wordfence

Vulnerability scoring details

Base CVSS 3.1 score

4.3 Medium
CVSS 3.1 vector shape for CVE-2026-9722 Attack VectorAttack ComplexityPrivileges RequiredUser InteractionScopeConfidentiality ImpactIntegrity ImpactAvailability Impact

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector
NetworkAdjacentLocalPhysical
Attack Complexity
LowHigh
Privileges Required
NoneLowHigh
User Interaction
NoneRequired
Scope
ChangedUnchanged
Confidentiality Impact
HighLowNone
Integrity Impact
HighLowNone
Availability Impact
HighLowNone

Vulnerability timeline

Timeline events are normalized from CVE metadata, CNA source timelines, ADP timelines, and KEV metadata when present.

  1. CVE reserved CVE Program

    The CVE ID was reserved by the assigning CNA.

  2. Source timeline Wordfence

    Disclosed

  3. CVE published CVE Program

    The CVE record was published.

  4. CVE updated CVE Program

    The CVE record metadata indicates this as the latest update time.

ADP provider summaries

CISA-ADP CISA ADP Vulnrichment
other:ssvc

Source materials

Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

Vendor Product Version / package Status
pcis Laiser Tag 0 unaffected
Weakness

CWE details

CWE-352

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.

CWE-352 · source CWE mapping

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.

Open CWE intelligence Same-CWE CVEs