Home/CVE/The Groundhogg, CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to generic SQL Injection v
CVE

CVE-2026-13333

The Groundhogg, CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to generic SQL Injection v

The Groundhogg, CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to generic SQL Injection via 'query[select]' Parameter in all versions up to, and including, 4.5.5 due to insufficient escaping on the user supplied parameter and lack of sufficient preparation on the existing SQL query. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Sales Representative-level access and above, to append additional SQL queries into already existing queries that can be used to extract sensitive information from the database. The sanitized Contact_Query code path can be bypassed by supplying an invalid filter type (e.g., query[filters][0][0][type]=invalid_filter_nonexistent), causing a FilterException to be caught and execution to fall through to the unsanitized Legacy_Contact_Query path.

MEDIUM · CVSS 6.5 EPSS 0.00344
EPSS exploitation odds0.34% · top 73%
Monitor
  • No active-exploitation, high-EPSS, or public-exploit signals - routine patching cadence
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-13333, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked. EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal. CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score. Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits. PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).

Exploitation momentum

2 days of EPSS
stable
Exploitation pressure is steady. This reads the direction and speed of EPSS over time, which can move before EPSS itself peaks or before CISA lists it.
Window

Severity & exploitation scoring

View on NVD →
CVSS base score
6.5
MEDIUMCVSS v3.1 · [email protected]
EPSS exploitation probability
0.34%
Top 73%odds of exploitation in the next 30 days
CVSS metric silhouette
VectorComplexityPrivilegesInteractionScopeConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
shape grows toward worst-case
SSVC triage
No SSVC vulnrichment for this CVE. CISA's Vulnrichment program scores newer CVEs (~2024 onwards) plus selected older critical ones. Use the EPSS probability + KEV status to triage instead.
CVSS vector breakdown
Exploitability - how they get in
Attack Vector
Network Adjacent Local Physical
Attack Complexity
Low High
Privileges Required
None Low High
User Interaction
None Required
Scope
Unchanged Changed
Impact - what breaks
Confidentiality
None Low High
Integrity
None Low High
Availability
None Low High
VECTORCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

ATT&CK techniques

1

Techniques this CVE enables. Pills with a solid outline are high confidence - named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei, or human-curated by CTID; the rest are inferred from the weakness type using MITRE's CVE Mapping Methodology and the CWE → CAPEC chain. Broad, generic-weakness guesses are filtered out. A small marks a technique that N independent sources agree on.

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques