Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

s2Member <= 260927 - Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution via 'item_name' IPN Parameter

Not in CISA KEVPublic exploit codeTrending #7CVE-2026-86596CWE-94

Not confirmed exploited. No WAF vendor names it yet. 1 public exploit repo.

Edge rules
0/8
Our test
No exploit yet
CVSS
9.8
EPSS
—
Posts, 14d
42026-10-20: 0 posts2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 4 posts
Published
2026-11-02
The s2Member plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in all versions up to, and including, <= 260927 via the 'item_name' parameter parameter. This is due to insufficient sanitization in strip_php_tags_deep(), which only… More

The s2Member plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in all versions up to, and including, <= 260927 via the 'item_name' parameter parameter. This is due to insufficient sanitization in strip_php_tags_deep(), which only strips literal '<?' sequences, combined with a post-interpolation placeholder cleanup that reassembles a valid '<?php' opener after the attacker-controlled value has already been embedded in the email template. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with custom-level access and above, to execute code on the server.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2026-86596: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Workers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.

Severity, decoded

CVSS 3.1
Critical · 9.8 / 10

Exploitable over the network, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality, integrity and availability.

Over the internetNo login neededNo user actionWorks reliablyFull compromise
How the score is built8 metrics
  • Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.
    Network
  • Attack complexityNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
    Low
  • Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.
    None
  • User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.
    None
  • ScopeThe damage stays within the vulnerable component.
    Unchanged
  • Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.
    High
  • Integrity impactAn attacker can change any data or files the affected component protects.
    High
  • Availability impactAn attacker can take the component down completely or keep it from serving anyone.
    High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Public exploits

1 found
0 Metasploit0 Exploit-DB0 Scanner template1 GitHub PoCs

No exploit in Exploit-DB or Metasploit, and no scanner template. That lowers, but doesn't remove, the chance of mass exploitation.

Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.

Timeline

  1. 2026-11-02
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2026-11-02
    First public exploit repository
    thiscitze/cve-2026-86596-poc: CVE-2026-86596 s2Member <= 260927 template-injection PoC (lab; IPN verification required)
  3. 2026-11-02
    First social mention we saw

Social

2026-10-20: 0 posts2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 4 posts

Exploit repos · unvetted, don't run

  • thiscitze·

    thiscitze/cve-2026-86596-poc: CVE-2026-86596 s2Member <= 260927 template-injection PoC (lab; IPN verification required)

    View on GitHub

Top posts

  • 3rl@thiscitze·

    cve-2026-86596 https://t.co/2OXNEaFlF8

    View on X
  • cve.now@cvedotnow·

    🆕 New CVE remote code execution in IPN email template handling (CVE-2026-86596) An attacker with custom-level access can inject PHP code via the item_name parameter to run any code on the server. No patch listed yet https://t.co/pGAqpzrMM3

    View on X
  • cve.new@cvedotnew·

    CVE-2026-86596 · CRITICAL · CVSS 9.8 The s2Member WordPress plugin is vulnerable in versions up to 260927 due to insufficient sanitization, allowing authenticated attackers with custom-level access to potentially execute code. CVSS 3.1 · Wordfence https://t.co/1fBdWfFlBi

    View on X

Vendor statements

Quoted
CloudflareWAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each row gives the rule ID and its default action. The feed starts in January 2025, so older rules are missing.

AWSAWS WAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.

Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.

Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.

FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patchesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The feed holds only the latest 25 changes, so history builds up from the day we started reading it.

F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each signature lists the CVEs it references, with its id and date. F5 does not state a default action; signatures enforce once staging ends in your policy.

AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)No public source

This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.

OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.