Description

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability in Groundhogg Groundhogg groundhogg allows Blind SQL Injection.This issue affects Groundhogg: from n/a through 4.8.3.

Executive Summary

Technical Details

Mitigations

References

Additional Metadata

{
  "score": "7.6",
  "pubDate": "2026-10-05T09:17:08.623Z",
  "pubdate": "2026-10-05T09:17:08.623Z",
  "executiveSummary": "Groundhogg versions from n/a through 4.8.3 are susceptible to a Blind SQL Injection vulnerability, categorized under CWE-89: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command.\nThis vulnerability allows an unauthenticated or authenticated attacker to inject arbitrary SQL commands into the backend database by manipulating inadequately sanitized input parameters.\nThe primary risk implication is the potential for unauthorized data exfiltration, database structure exposure, and manipulation of application content.\nThe Blind SQL Injection vector enables attackers to infer database content through boolean-based or time-based inferential techniques, observing the application's response behavior to confirm the validity of injected SQL queries.\nSuccessful exploitation compromises the confidentiality and integrity of the Groundhogg plugin database, potentially exposing sensitive marketing or user data managed by the system.",
  "technicalDetails": "The vulnerability originates from the failure of the Groundhogg plugin to properly sanitize or parameterize user-supplied input before incorporating it into SQL queries. By failing to use prepared statements or robust input validation mechanisms, the application permits the injection of malicious SQL tokens that alter the intended query logic.\nThe attack vector is identified as Blind SQL Injection. Unlike traditional SQL injection, which directly returns query results to the application interface, Blind SQL Injection requires the attacker to elicit a binary response from the server—typically through changes in page content (Boolean-based) or response delays (Time-based).\nThe exploitation flow typically begins with the identification of an entry point where user input is passed to a database-interacting function. An attacker sends a series of crafted requests containing conditional SQL fragments. For instance, by injecting ' AND (SELECT 1 FROM (SELECT COUNT(*), CONCAT(0x7e, (SELECT table_name FROM information_schema.tables LIMIT 0,1), 0x7e)x FROM information_schema.tables GROUP BY x)a)--', the attacker can trigger distinct response patterns based on whether the condition evaluates to true or false.\nBy systematically iterating through character sets and monitoring the server's output or response latency, the attacker can reconstruct the database schema, extract administrative credentials, or dump sensitive tables row by row.\nGiven that this vulnerability affects the core processing logic of the Groundhogg plugin, it exposes any database interaction facilitated by the plugin within the target WordPress environment. The impact is elevated if the database user associated with the web application possesses excessive privileges, potentially allowing the attacker to interact with the broader database instance beyond the scope of Groundhogg data.\nThe lack of neutralization of special elements ensures that the database driver interprets injected payload components as executable commands rather than literal data. Without sufficient input validation, allow-listing, or the consistent application of parameterized queries via the WordPress $wpdb API, the application remains vulnerable to ongoing exploitation via the identified injection points."
}