VulnerabilityPublished 17 Oct 2024Updated 18 Nov 2024

CVE-2024-49593: Advanced Custom Fields · Cross-site Scripting

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · fixed in 6.3.9 : update affected systems when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 16:39 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 44% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 6.3.9, 6.3.6.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Oct 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

Immediately update Advanced Custom Fields to version 6.3.9 or later and Secure Custom Fields to version 6.3.6.3 or later to apply the official patches addressing this vulnerability.
For users of the free ACF version on WP Engine, follow the vendor's documented alternative update mechanism to ensure timely patching.
Restrict access to the Field Group editor interface to trusted administrators only, using role-based access controls and IP whitelisting where possible.
Implement Web Application Firewall (WAF) rules to detect and block suspicious input patterns that may indicate XSS payloads targeting these plugins.
Conduct regular security audits and monitoring of WordPress admin activity logs to detect unusual behavior or unauthorized field edits.
Educate site administrators about the risks of stored XSS and encourage cautious handling of plugin field content.
Consider employing Content Security Policy (CSP) headers to limit the execution of unauthorized scripts in the WordPress admin area.
Backup WordPress sites regularly to enable quick recovery in case of compromise. These steps collectively reduce the risk of exploitation and limit potential damage from this vulnerability.

Description

In Advanced Custom Fields (ACF) before 6.3.9 and Secure Custom Fields before 6.3.6.3 (plugins for WordPress), using the Field Group editor to edit one of the plugin's fields can result in execution of a stored XSS payload. NOTE: if you wish to use the WP Engine alternative update mechanism for the free version of ACF, then you can follow the process shown at the advancedcustomfields.com blog URL within the References section below.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-49593 is the compromise of confidentiality through stored XSS attacks. An attacker exploiting this vulnerability can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the context of an administrator or other privileged user accessing the Field Group editor or affected pages. This can lead to session hijacking, theft of authentication tokens, or unauthorized actions performed on behalf of the victim. Although the vulnerability does not directly affect data integrity or system availability, the loss of confidentiality can facilitate further attacks or unauthorized access. Organizations running WordPress sites with these plugins are at risk of targeted attacks, especially if administrative access is not tightly controlled. The ease of exploitation without authentication or user interaction increases the threat level for publicly accessible WordPress installations. Additionally, compromised admin sessions could lead to site defacement, malware injection, or data exfiltration. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk, but the widespread use of these plugins means the potential impact is significant if attackers develop and deploy exploit code.

CWE-79Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #1OWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Implementation · Architecture and Design
Understand the context in which your data will be used and the encoding that will be expected. This is especially important when transmitting data between different components, or when generating outputs that can contain multiple encodings at the same time, such as web pages or multi-part mail messages.
Architecture and Design · Implementation · Attack Surface Reduction
Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter your software: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XSS Using MIME Type Mismatch (opens in a new tab)
DOM-Based XSS (opens in a new tab)
Reflected XSS (opens in a new tab)
Stored XSS (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 00:25 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-79

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats