NVD / CVE Program· CNA GitHub_M

CVE-2026-53639: Sylius: IDOR on Shop Payment Request API endpoints

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 25/100)

The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.54% (FIRST EPSS).
Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
Fixed version: sylius/sylius (Packagist) 2.0.18, 2.1.15, 2.2.6.

Low priority for now. Upgrade to sylius/sylius (Packagist) 2.0.18, 2.1.15, 2.2.6 or later.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

Sylius is an Open Source eCommerce Framework on Symfony. Starting in version 2.0.0 and prior to version 2.0.18, 2.1.15, and 2.2.6, the `GET /api/v2/shop/payment-requests/{hash}` and `PUT /api/v2/shop/payment-requests/{hash}` endpoints look up the payment request solely by the hash from the URL. No ownership check is performed against the authenticated customer or the underlying order. An attacker who obtains a payment request hash can read the payment request and, through the `payment` IRI in the response, recover the underlying order's `tokenValue` (which itself grants access to the full order, items, addresses, customer email, totals); and/or update the payment request payload (e.g. `target_path`, `after_path`). These fields are used by the front-end controller to redirect the user after the payment, so an attacker can flip them to an attacker-controlled URL and intercept the buyer. The hash is a UUID, so it has to be obtained out-of-band (logs, shared links, referrer headers, a co-located client), but once it is known no other credential is required, neither authentication nor knowledge of the order token. The creation endpoint `POST /api/v2/shop/orders/{tokenValue}/payment-requests` shares the same flaw: it resolves the target order solely from the `tokenValue` in the URL without verifying that the caller owns the order. The issue is fixed in versions 2.0.18, 2.1.15, and 2.2.6. As a workaround, add a query extension that filters the `GET` operation; decorate the `PUT` state provider, guard the `POST` creation endpoint with a command-bus middleware, and wire the services.

MediumCVSS 6.3 · v4.0—No exploit Fix available

Published: Sep 8, 2026
Updated: Sep 9, 2026
EPSS: 0.5% · 45th percentile
CWE: CWE-639

Report tools

JSON

Action score

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS: 25 / 40 · 6.3 / 10
CISA KEV: 0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS: 0 / 30 · 0.5%

CISA SSVC decision

Exploitation: none
Automatable: no
Technical impact: partial

Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.

CNA vs NVD score

NVD: —
CNA · GitHub_M: 6.3; NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Get told when this record changes

Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
No public exploit code on record
A fix has been released

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

—

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

Sylius Sylius
- >= 2.0.0, < 2.0.18, >= 2.1.0, < 2.1.15, >= 2.2.0, < 2.2.6affected

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

Ecosystem	Package	Affected range	Fix
Packagist	sylius/sylius	from 2.0.0 · before 2.0.18	2.0.18
Packagist	sylius/sylius	from 2.1.0 · before 2.1.15	2.1.15
Packagist	sylius/sylius	from 2.2.0 · before 2.2.6	2.2.6

Same product

sylius: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

CVE-2026-100872Sylius 2.x before 2.1.16 and 2.2.9 Payment Amount Overwrite
34Monitor
CVE-2026-100871Sylius before 1.12.25, 1.13.17, 1.14.20, 2.1.16, and 2.2.9 JWT Audience Confusion Allows Admin API Authentication
34Monitor
CVE-2026-100870Sylius before 1.12.25, 1.13.17, 1.14.20, 2.1.16, and 2.2.9 Admin Password Reset Poisoning via Host Header
34Monitor

Published before and after this one in the same product

← EarlierCVE-2026-53637Sep 8, 2026 · Sylius: Cart FormComponent allows modification or deletion of an already-completed order
26Monitor
← EarlierCVE-2026-53638Sep 8, 2026 · Sylius: Channel-based payment method restriction bypass on shop account orders API endpoint
17Monitor
Later →CVE-2026-100869Sep 27, 2026 · Sylius 2.x before 2.1.16 and 2.2.9 Arbitrary Payment Action via Shop API
32Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / package	Fixed version	Source
Packagist:sylius/sylius	2.0.18	Package registry (OSV)
Packagist:sylius/sylius	2.1.15	Package registry (OSV)
Packagist:sylius/sylius	2.2.6	Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

CVE-2026-31820182 days apartSylius affected by IDOR in Cart and Checkout LiveComponents
28Monitor
CVE-2026-10872433 days apartSylius through 2.3.0 Authorization Bypass via Shop API Product-Review Endpoint
27Monitor

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
No account or password is required.
No user action is required.
No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
Integrity
Availability

Attack vector: Network
Attack complexity: Low
Privileges required: None
User interaction: None
Scope: X

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-639 · Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key

CVSS vector

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

nvd-secondary

Root cause

The endpoint fetches the record by the ID sent in the request, but never checks whether the record belongs to the requesting user.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-639 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

1const invoice = await Invoice.findById(req.params.id);
2res.json(invoice);

Fixed

1const invoice = await Invoice.findOne({
2  id: req.params.id,
3  ownerId: req.user.id,
4});
5if (!invoice) return res.sendStatus(404);
6res.json(invoice);

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.

Change log

Fix✗ → ✓Sep 28, 2026, 10:46 PM UTC

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

github.com/Sylius/Sylius/security/advisories/GHSA-mr9r-h354-966r

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records