By Null Ventures MCP platform
Menu

vulnerability / NVI-00005492 / Revision 3

Sylius Mollie Plugin vulnerable to payment status forgery via the payment webhook

GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for sylius/mollie-plugin, sylius/mollie-plugin, sylius/mollie-plugin. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.

source listedactiveGHSA-rc52-c4hv-w89pCVE-2026-68500

This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.

01 / Meaning

Why it matters

Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.

CVSS

7.5 high

GitHub source severity; exploitability and local consequence require separate evidence.

As of · GitHub Advisory Database

EPSS

0.681%

FIRST EPSS model v2026.06.15; exploitation probability over 30 days, percentile 0.52468. Missing scores are unknown.

As of · FIRST EPSS

02 / Applicability

The affected context

Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.

sylius/mollie-plugin

source listed
  • < 2.2.8

### Impact The shop payment webhook `POST /{_locale}/update-payment` (route `sylius_mollie_shop_payment_webhook`) accepts two independent, attacker-controlled parameters: `id` (the Mollie payment ID, verified against Mollie's API) and `orderId` (the Sylius order ID, read directly from the database). The handler never verifies that the Mollie payment belongs to the referenced order. An unauthenticated attacker who holds any valid **paid** Mollie payment ID, for example from a EUR 1 order they placed themselves, can submit it together with any victim `orderId`. The victim's order payment is then transitioned to `completed` (or any other Mollie-derived state) without any funds being transferred for that order. Sylius order IDs are sequential integers, and the endpoint requires no authentication, CSRF token or rate limiting, so the attack scales trivially across all pending orders. ### Patches Fixed in versions **2.2.8**, **3.2.4** and **3.3.1**. The webhook now binds the payment to the order: it reads the Mollie payment ID stored server-side for that order when the payment was created and compares it to the incoming Mollie payment ID. On mismatch the

GitHub Advisory Database

sylius/mollie-plugin

source listed
  • >= 3.0.0, < 3.2.4

### Impact The shop payment webhook `POST /{_locale}/update-payment` (route `sylius_mollie_shop_payment_webhook`) accepts two independent, attacker-controlled parameters: `id` (the Mollie payment ID, verified against Mollie's API) and `orderId` (the Sylius order ID, read directly from the database). The handler never verifies that the Mollie payment belongs to the referenced order. An unauthenticated attacker who holds any valid **paid** Mollie payment ID, for example from a EUR 1 order they placed themselves, can submit it together with any victim `orderId`. The victim's order payment is then transitioned to `completed` (or any other Mollie-derived state) without any funds being transferred for that order. Sylius order IDs are sequential integers, and the endpoint requires no authentication, CSRF token or rate limiting, so the attack scales trivially across all pending orders. ### Patches Fixed in versions **2.2.8**, **3.2.4** and **3.3.1**. The webhook now binds the payment to the order: it reads the Mollie payment ID stored server-side for that order when the payment was created and compares it to the incoming Mollie payment ID. On mismatch the

GitHub Advisory Database

sylius/mollie-plugin

source listed
  • >= 3.3.0, < 3.3.1

### Impact The shop payment webhook `POST /{_locale}/update-payment` (route `sylius_mollie_shop_payment_webhook`) accepts two independent, attacker-controlled parameters: `id` (the Mollie payment ID, verified against Mollie's API) and `orderId` (the Sylius order ID, read directly from the database). The handler never verifies that the Mollie payment belongs to the referenced order. An unauthenticated attacker who holds any valid **paid** Mollie payment ID, for example from a EUR 1 order they placed themselves, can submit it together with any victim `orderId`. The victim's order payment is then transitioned to `completed` (or any other Mollie-derived state) without any funds being transferred for that order. Sylius order IDs are sequential integers, and the endpoint requires no authentication, CSRF token or rate limiting, so the attack scales trivially across all pending orders. ### Patches Fixed in versions **2.2.8**, **3.2.4** and **3.3.1**. The webhook now binds the payment to the order: it reads the Mollie payment ID stored server-side for that order when the payment was created and compares it to the incoming Mollie payment ID. On mismatch the

GitHub Advisory Database

sylius/mollie-plugin

source listed
  • ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 2.2.8

### Impact The shop payment webhook `POST /{_locale}/update-payment` (route `sylius_mollie_shop_payment_webhook`) accepts two independent, attacker-controlled parameters: `id` (the Mollie payment ID, verified against Mollie's API) and `orderId` (the Sylius order ID, read directly from the database). The handler never verifies that the Mollie payment belongs to the referenced order. An unauthenticated attacker who holds any valid **paid** Mollie payment ID, for example from a EUR 1 order they placed themselves, can submit it together with any victim `orderId`. The victim's order payment is then transitioned to `completed` (or any other Mollie-derived state) without any funds being transferred for that order. Sylius order IDs are sequential integers, and the endpoint requires no authentication, CSRF token or rate limiting, so the attack scales trivially across all pending orders. ### Patches Fixed in versions **2.2.8**, **3.2.4** and **3.3.1**. The webhook now binds the payment to the order: it reads the Mollie payment ID stored server-side for that order when the payment was created and compares it to the incoming Mollie payment ID. On mismatch the

GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

sylius/mollie-plugin

source listed
  • ECOSYSTEM: introduced 3.0.0; fixed 3.2.4

### Impact The shop payment webhook `POST /{_locale}/update-payment` (route `sylius_mollie_shop_payment_webhook`) accepts two independent, attacker-controlled parameters: `id` (the Mollie payment ID, verified against Mollie's API) and `orderId` (the Sylius order ID, read directly from the database). The handler never verifies that the Mollie payment belongs to the referenced order. An unauthenticated attacker who holds any valid **paid** Mollie payment ID, for example from a EUR 1 order they placed themselves, can submit it together with any victim `orderId`. The victim's order payment is then transitioned to `completed` (or any other Mollie-derived state) without any funds being transferred for that order. Sylius order IDs are sequential integers, and the endpoint requires no authentication, CSRF token or rate limiting, so the attack scales trivially across all pending orders. ### Patches Fixed in versions **2.2.8**, **3.2.4** and **3.3.1**. The webhook now binds the payment to the order: it reads the Mollie payment ID stored server-side for that order when the payment was created and compares it to the incoming Mollie payment ID. On mismatch the

GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

sylius/mollie-plugin

source listed
  • ECOSYSTEM: introduced 3.3.0; fixed 3.3.1

### Impact The shop payment webhook `POST /{_locale}/update-payment` (route `sylius_mollie_shop_payment_webhook`) accepts two independent, attacker-controlled parameters: `id` (the Mollie payment ID, verified against Mollie's API) and `orderId` (the Sylius order ID, read directly from the database). The handler never verifies that the Mollie payment belongs to the referenced order. An unauthenticated attacker who holds any valid **paid** Mollie payment ID, for example from a EUR 1 order they placed themselves, can submit it together with any victim `orderId`. The victim's order payment is then transitioned to `completed` (or any other Mollie-derived state) without any funds being transferred for that order. Sylius order IDs are sequential integers, and the endpoint requires no authentication, CSRF token or rate limiting, so the attack scales trivially across all pending orders. ### Patches Fixed in versions **2.2.8**, **3.2.4** and **3.3.1**. The webhook now binds the payment to the order: it reads the Mollie payment ID stored server-side for that order when the payment was created and compares it to the incoming Mollie payment ID. On mismatch the

GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

03 / Response

What to do next

  1. investigate

    Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. FIRST EPSS

  2. vendor patch

    The original advisory lists fixed boundaries 2.2.8 for sylius/mollie-plugin. Confirm the publisher’s latest guidance.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

  3. vendor patch

    The original advisory lists fixed boundaries 3.2.4 for sylius/mollie-plugin. Confirm the publisher’s latest guidance.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

  4. vendor patch

    The original advisory lists fixed boundaries 3.3.1 for sylius/mollie-plugin. Confirm the publisher’s latest guidance.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database via OSV

A fixed release is not deployment evidence.

Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.

04 / Limits

What this report cannot establish

  • Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
Read the collection and interpretation limits ↗

05 / Provenance

Sources you can inspect

Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.

  1. GHSA-rc52-c4hv-w89p ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.

  2. GHSA-rc52-c4hv-w89p ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database via OSV · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub-origin advisory, CC-BY-4.0; OSV is an aggregate copy, not independent corroboration.

  3. CVE-2026-68500 ↗

    FIRST EPSS · official catalog

    Observed . FIRST EPSS; probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, not local compromise. Dataset date/model retained; FIRST services terms apply.

Public revision history

Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.

  1. Revision 3 ·

    Dated EPSS estimate updated; this is not a new disclosure or proof of exploitation.

  2. Revision 2 ·

    Source facts changed; compare the preserved prior revision.

  3. Revision 1 ·

    First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.

Read the public revision data ↗

The next step is private

Bring the question into your environment.

The connected workflow is a development preview for inventory, contextual matching, owner decisions and evidence-based verification. No system-specific result is generated by this page.

See the synthetic workflow preview ↗