Skip to content

CVE-2026-12409

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF): Is CVE-2026-12409 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
4.3 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.1%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

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

The Landing Page Builder – Coming Soon page, Maintenance Mode, Lead Page, WordPress Landing Pages plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.5.3.6. This is due to missing or incorrect nonce validation on the ulpb_admin_ajax function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to create, update, retitle, or change the post status, slug, and type of arbitrary posts and write ULPB_DATA post meta via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link. This attack requires the victim to hold an editor-level or administrator session, as the wp_ajax_ulpb_admin_data action enforces a capability check that the forged request must satisfy by inheriting the logged-in user's session cookies.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-12409
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12409/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12409)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12409"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-12409/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-12409"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF).