Borlabs Cookie save blocked as XSS in fallbackCode
-
Hello Wordfence team,
An authenticated save of a Borlabs Cookie Google Analytics service was blocked on 23 September 2026 at 18:38:09 UTC with HTTP 403. The recorded Wordfence reason is “XSS: Cross Site Scripting in POST body: fallbackCode”. The target was the regular /wp-admin/admin.php Borlabs service editor. The historical full POST payload and a numeric rule ID were not preserved. We have not repeated a production write merely to reproduce the block.
Recorded versions on 24 September: Wordfence 9.0.1, Borlabs Cookie 3.4.4, WordPress 7.1.2, PHP 8.3.33. These are observed installation versions, not a claim about current releases. WAF is Enabled and Protecting with Basic WordPress Protection and Community rules.
On 26 September at 15:52 UTC, a manual rules refresh returned “Rules updated” successfully. Live Traffic filtered by URL contains borlabs-cookie-services, with All Hits and no date filter, showed no matching retained requests. Neither observation confirms a fix for the historical block.
Two older exceptions already exist for request.body[optInCode] and request.body[optOutCode] on /wp-admin/admin.php, listed as added via the false positive dialog on 5 September. They were not added or changed for this investigation. No fallbackCode exception is listed.
Borlabs referred the Wordfence-specific question to your team. The separate consent-configuration question remains with Borlabs. We request a supported diagnosis:
- What minimum read-only evidence and rule identifier do you need, and how can we obtain them through the normal plugin interface?
- Is there a secure non-public channel for a limited sanitized code sample if required? We will not post credentials, tokens, full logs or customer data here.
- Is a rule or compatibility correction available without adding an exception, using Learning Mode, disabling a rule, obfuscating code or bypassing the normal save route?
- How should the necessity of the two existing exceptions be assessed without changing production protection first?
- Before today’s successful manual refresh, the next scheduled rule check was displayed as 30 September 2026, 14:20 UTC. Which limited diagnostic confirms whether scheduling is functioning correctly?
Extended Protection is a separate pending hardening task requiring configuration-file backups and an independent recovery path. We do not assume that enabling it would resolve this POST block. Thank you.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.