CVE-2026-107616VulnerabilityPublished 7 Nov 2026

The Amelia plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized access of attendee data due to a missing authorization

Source GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-107616· High 7.5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 7 Nov 2026, 13:19 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (Wordfence)	CVSS 3.1	7.5

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 7 Nov 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 7 Nov 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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.

ghsa-5gw3-gf5c-2x2p

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
melogranoBooking for Appointments and Events Calendar – Amelia	Affected >=9.0 <=9.9.1	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Users should restrict the assignment of the 'wpamelia-customer' role and other roles with the 'amelia_read_events' capability until a fix is available. Monitor the vendor's advisory channels for updates and apply any forthcoming patches promptly. Avoid exposing the '/report/event/attendees' endpoint to untrusted authenticated users.

Description

The Amelia WordPress plugin versions up to and including 9.9.1 have a vulnerability that allows unauthorized access to attendee data. This is due to a missing authorization check in the GetEventAttendeesCommandHandler::handle() function, which only verifies a broad capability that lower-privileged roles possess. As a result, authenticated users with wpamelia-customer-level access or higher can export sensitive attendee information for any event by supplying an arbitrary event ID to the relevant endpoint.

Impact

Authenticated users with wpamelia-customer-level access or higher can access and export sensitive personally identifiable information of event attendees across all events on the site. This includes private notes and payment information, which poses a significant privacy and data protection risk. The vulnerability does not allow privilege escalation or denial of service but results in a confidentiality breach of attendee data.

Summary

The Amelia plugin for WordPress suffers from an authorization bypass vulnerability in versions up to 9.9.1. The GetEventAttendeesCommandHandler::handle() function enforces only the broad 'amelia_read_events' capability, which is granted to the 'wpamelia-customer' role, but fails to verify that the requesting user is an organizer or provider of the specific event referenced by the client-supplied 'id' parameter. This flaw enables authenticated users with minimal privileges to access and export a full CSV containing personally identifiable information of attendees, including names, emails, phone numbers, dates of birth, gender, private notes, payment details, WooCommerce order IDs, custom fields, and uploaded file URLs, for any event on the site.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 7 Nov 2026, 13:19 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats