`@bsv/wallet-toolbox` / `-client` / `-mobile` don't verify storage-supplied recipient output scripts against caller-requested outputs in createAction (can redirect payments when using remote storage)
Summary
| CVE | CVE-2026-56744 |
|---|---|
| State | PUBLISHED |
| Assigner | GitHub_M |
| Source Priority | CVE Program / NVD first with legacy fallback |
| Published | 2026-09-24 17:17:05 UTC |
| Updated | 2026-09-30 19:57:08 UTC |
| Description | `@bsv/wallet-toolbox` provides BRC-100 wallet signing and storage components, while `@bsv/wallet-toolbox-client` and `@bsv/wallet-toolbox-mobile` provide client-focused distributions for standard and mobile applications using wallet storage services. A vulnerability in these packages causes transactions created through a remote `StorageClient` to trust output locking scripts returned by the storage provider without verifying that they match the outputs requested by the caller. A malicious or compromised storage provider can substitute a recipient script or inject an additional output, causing the wallet to sign and broadcast a transaction that redirects funds while the application and user interface continue to display the intended recipient. Source and npm publication history indicate that stable versions `@bsv/wallet-toolbox` and `@bsv/wallet-toolbox-client` from 1.1.47 through 2.3.3, and `@bsv/wallet-toolbox-mobile` from its initial 1.3.21 release through 2.3.3, are affected. All three packages are patched in version 2.4.0. Applications unable to upgrade should avoid remote `StorageClient` providers, use local storage, or independently verify every transaction output’s locking script and value against the original request before signing |
Risk And Classification
Primary CVSS: v4.0 8.7 HIGH from [email protected]
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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
EPSS: 0.003020000 probability, percentile 0.205730000 (date 2026-09-29)
Problem Types: CWE-1288 | CWE-1288 CWE-1288: Improper Validation of Consistency within Input
| Version | Source | Type | Score | Severity | Vector |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.0 | [email protected] | Secondary | 8.7 | HIGH | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/C... |
| 4.0 | CNA | DECLARED | 8.7 | HIGH | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N |
CVSS v4.0 Breakdown
Attack Vector
NetworkAttack Complexity
LowAttack Requirements
NonePrivileges Required
NoneUser Interaction
NoneConfidentiality
NoneIntegrity
HighAvailability
NoneSub Conf.
NoneSub Integrity
NoneSub Availability
NoneCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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
Vendor Declared Affected Products
| Source | Vendor | Product | Version | Platforms |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNA | Bsv-blockchain | @bsv/wallet-toolbox | affected >= 1.1.47, < 2.4.0 | Not specified |
| CNA | Bsv-blockchain | @bsv/wallet-toolbox-client | affected >= 1.1.47, < 2.4.0 | Not specified |
| CNA | Bsv-blockchain | @bsv/wallet-toolbox-mobile | affected >= 1.3.21, < 2.4.0 | Not specified |
References
| Reference | Source | Link | Tags |
|---|---|---|---|
| github.com/bsv-blockchain/ts-stack/commit/5492cabbef4ddc7f60cc49cdf5d8c7... | [email protected] | github.com | |
| github.com/bsv-blockchain/ts-stack/commit/3a11f6111919245a3090e9f3895cfc... | [email protected] | github.com | |
| github.com/bsv-blockchain/wallet-toolbox/commit/ca651b067c0238cd8b1ddd3a... | [email protected] | github.com | |
| github.com/bsv-blockchain/ts-stack/commit/5ee60395e78e8b822d9a78efeacc60... | [email protected] | github.com | |
| github.com/bsv-blockchain/ts-stack/security/advisories/GHSA-36f9-7rg5-cpf8 | 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 | github.com | |
| CVE Program record | CVE.ORG | www.cve.org | canonical |
| NVD vulnerability detail | NVD | nvd.nist.gov | canonical, analysis |
No vendor comments have been submitted for this CVE.
There are currently no legacy QID mappings associated with this CVE.