Skip to content
Fencer Intel
medium 6.8

CVE-2026-104898 json

Online Scheduling and Appointment Booking System <= 28.4 - Insecure Direct Object Reference to Authenticated (Subscriber+) Privilege Escalation via 'id' and 'wp_user_id' Parameters via Query String / JSON Body

published 30d ago modified 27d ago also EUVD-2026-96035

cvss
6.8
version 3.1, CNA
cisa kev
Not listed
not in CISA's catalog
epss
0.2%
EPSS 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days, percentile 16%
public exploits
0
none known

Summary

The Online Scheduling and Appointment Booking System – Bookly plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 28.4 via the 'id, wp_user_id' parameter due to missing validation on a user controlled key. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with subscriber-level access and above, to overwrite the WordPress account binding of any Bookly staff record, including those owned by administrators, effectively hijacking a higher-privileged staff member's account association and escalating privileges. Exploitation requires the attacking user to be linked to at least one Bookly staff record, which occurs by default whenever an admin enables the bookly_gen_allow_staff_edit_profile option (active on fresh installs) and links a WordPress user to a staff entry.

Is CVE-2026-104898 in your stack? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.

Check with Fencer

CISA SSVC

Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
total
Assessed
29d ago

Exploit prediction

0.25% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 16% of all scored CVEs (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-09).

CVSS scores

assigned by version score vector
CNA 3.1 6.8 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Affected products

  • ladela Online Scheduling and Appointment Booking System – Bookly

Classification

Weakness
  • CWE-639 Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key
Technology feeds

References

Sources

Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.