CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-115301NVD status: Deferred

Contact Form by Supsystic: Improper Control of Generation of Code

CVE-2026-115301 is a high-severity improper control of generation of code vulnerability in Contact Form by Supsystic, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.2 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with administrator privileges, without any action from a user. The record lists version 1.11.1 as the first without the flaw, so updating Contact Form by Supsystic to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.42% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update Contact Form by Supsystic to 1.11.1 or a later version.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Contact Form by SupsysticContact Form by Supsysticbefore 1.11.11.11.1

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
HighAdministrator-level access is required first.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CISA (ADP).

Official description

The Contact Form by Supsystic WordPress plugin before 1.11.1 does not sandbox the template engine used to render its forms and allows stored form-editor content to reach that engine as executable template code, enabling an administrator to perform server-side template injection and execute arbitrary code on the server. The injected template is compiled and executed whenever any visitor loads a page containing the form, so the stored payload also lets an unauthenticated visitor read server-side secrets such as authentication salts and database credentials.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Control of Generation of Code

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
  • Run your code in a jail or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
  • Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.

More Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities (CWE-94)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).

References

Recent Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.