Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
- EPSS is 0.60% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE Intelligencesmub · WPForms – AI Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Survey Form, Quiz & More
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Fix not verifiedThe WPForms – Easy Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Surveys, & More plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection') in all versions up to, and including, 1.10.2 This is due to `get_reply_to_address()` processing the Reply-To display name through smart-tag expansion with context `'notification'` instead of `'notification-reply-to'`, which bypasses email-address validation while `wpforms_sanitize_textarea_field()` intentionally preserves CR/LF characters that are never stripped before the display name is concatenated into the raw `Reply-To:` mail header string. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary additional email headers — such as `Bcc:` — into outgoing notification emails, silently blind-copying all notification email copies to an attacker-controlled address. Exploitation requires that a form notification is configured to use a Paragraph Text (textarea) field as the Reply-To display name via a Smart Tag.
The WPForms – Easy Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Surveys, & More plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection') in all versions up to, and including, 1.10.2 This is due to `get_reply_to_address()` processing the Reply-To display name through smart-tag expansion with context `'notification'` instead of `'notification-reply-to'`, which bypasses email-address validation while `wpforms_sanitize_textarea_field()` intentionally preserves CR/LF characters that are never stripped before the display name is concatenated into the raw `Reply-To:` mail header string. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary additional email headers — such as `Bcc:` — into outgoing notification emails, silently blind-copying all notification email copies to an attacker-controlled address. Exploitation requires that a form notification is configured to use a Paragraph Text (textarea) field as the Reply-To display name via a Smart Tag.
The product uses CRLF (carriage return line feeds) as a special element, e.g. to separate lines or records, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CRLF sequences from inputs.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
The WPForms – Easy Form Builder for WordPress – Contact Forms, Payment Forms, Surveys, & More plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection') in all versions up to, and including, 1.10.2 This is due to `get_reply_to_address()` processing the Reply-To display name through smart-tag expansion with context `'notification'` instead of `'notification-reply-to'`, which bypasses email-address validation while `wpforms_sanitize_textarea_field()` intentionally preserves CR/LF characters that are never stripped before the display name is concatenated into the raw `Reply-To:` mail header string. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to inject arbitrary additional email headers — such as `Bcc:` — into outgoing notification emails, silently blind-copying all notification email copies to an attacker-controlled address. Exploitation requires that a form notification is configured to use a Paragraph Text (textarea) field as the Reply-To display name via a Smart Tag.
The product uses CRLF (carriage return line feeds) as a special element, e.g. to separate lines or records, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CRLF sequences from inputs.
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
CWE-93: Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection'). The product uses CRLF (carriage return line feeds) as a special element, e.g. to separate lines or records, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CRLF sequences from inputs.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 1 Jul 2026 · Last source change 1 Jul 2026, 10:42 UTC · CWE-93 · Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences ('CRLF Injection')
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.