CVE-2026-14029: Groundhogg Plugin SQL Injection Vulnerability – Critical Data Exposure Risk

Technical summary

CVE-2026-14029 is a SQL injection vulnerability (CWE-89) in the Groundhogg WordPress plugin affecting all versions through 4.5.8. The flaw resides in the handling of the 'select' parameter, where user input is not adequately escaped and the underlying SQL query lacks sufficient parameterization. An authenticated attacker holding a Groundhogg role with the view_contacts capability can craft malicious input to append arbitrary SQL statements to existing queries, enabling unauthorized data extraction from the WordPress database. The vulnerability requires authentication and a specific capability assignment, but these conditions are commonly met in typical Groundhogg deployments where multiple user roles inherit the view_contacts permission by default.

Business impact

Organizations relying on Groundhogg to manage customer data face a confidentiality breach risk. Sensitive information stored in the database—including customer contacts, interaction history, email lists, and any custom data fields—could be exfiltrated by insider threats or compromised accounts. The impact is heightened if the Groundhogg instance contains personally identifiable information (PII) subject to privacy regulations such as GDPR or CCPA. While the vulnerability does not allow data modification or system disruption, the unauthorized disclosure of customer records could damage reputation, trigger compliance incidents, and expose the organization to regulatory fines and litigation.

Affected systems

All versions of the Groundhogg — CRM, Newsletters, and Marketing Automation plugin for WordPress through version 4.5.8 are affected. Any WordPress installation running this plugin is vulnerable if at least one user has been assigned a Groundhogg role with the view_contacts capability. This includes administrative users, marketing staff, and support team members who are assigned default Groundhogg roles such as 'Marketer' or 'Support Agent'—roles that grant view_contacts by default. Organizations should audit their Groundhogg user base and role configurations to identify potentially exploitable accounts.

Exploitability

The vulnerability is practically exploitable but requires two conditions: the attacker must possess valid WordPress authentication credentials and a Groundhogg role with view_contacts capability. This is not a zero-day and does not affect unauthenticated users. However, the low barrier to exploitation (view_contacts is a default permission in most built-in roles) means that compromised user accounts, disgruntled insiders, or users with legitimate but excessive access can weaponize this flaw with minimal technical effort. The SQL injection itself is straightforward to craft once an attacker understands the parameter injection point. This is not currently listed in CISA's KEV catalog.

Remediation

Immediate patching is the primary remediation. Update the Groundhogg plugin to a version that addresses this vulnerability (verify the specific patched version against the official Groundhogg security advisory, as the source data does not specify a fixed version number). While patching is being deployed, implement a short-term access control measure: audit and restrict the view_contacts capability to only the minimum number of roles and users who genuinely require it. Remove this capability from roles where it is not essential, and disable or deprovision user accounts that no longer need access. For high-risk environments, consider temporarily deactivating the Groundhogg plugin until patched.

Patch guidance

Consult the official Groundhogg security advisory and plugin repository to identify the minimum version that resolves CVE-2026-14029. Update the plugin through the WordPress admin dashboard or via command line (wp plugin update groundhogg). Before applying the patch, back up the WordPress database and test the update in a staging environment to ensure compatibility with active extensions and customizations. Monitor Groundhogg's changelog and security notifications for any post-patch advisories. If the plugin cannot be updated immediately, use WordPress security plugins or Web Application Firewall (WAF) rules to monitor for suspicious SQL activity in the 'select' parameter.

Detection guidance

Monitor WordPress database query logs for unusual SQL patterns originating from the Groundhogg plugin, particularly UNION-based or time-based injection signatures in the 'select' parameter. Enable WordPress security logging on the affected server. Review Groundhogg user access logs to identify which accounts have accessed the view_contacts capability and when. Examine database access logs for queries executed by non-administrative WordPress database users that appear to extract large volumes of data or access sensitive tables. Implement network monitoring to detect exfiltration of customer contact data. If a WAF is in place, enable SQL injection detection rules and alert on attempts to manipulate the 'select' parameter.

Why prioritize this

Although the CVSS score is 6.5 (Medium), the vulnerability should be prioritized for rapid patching because it directly threatens customer data confidentiality. The low exploitation bar (existing user with a common capability) combined with the sensitivity of CRM data in regulated industries elevates the practical risk above a baseline Medium severity. Organizations handling customer PII should treat this as high-priority. A breach here could expose marketing lists, contact information, and custom customer fields to competitors, malicious actors, or unauthorized internal parties.

Risk score, explained

The CVSS 3.1 score of 6.5 reflects a Medium severity with high confidentiality impact but no integrity or availability impact. The score factors in network attack surface (AV:N), low complexity (AC:L), and the requirement for authenticated access and a specific role capability (PR:L). The score does not account for the prevalence of the view_contacts capability in default Groundhogg deployments or the sensitivity of CRM data, so security teams should apply business context and consider escalating the effective risk rating if the plugin manages customer data subject to regulatory obligations.

Frequently asked questions