VulnerabilityPublished 5 Sep 2025Updated 15 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-58795: Payoneer Checkout (WordPress plugin) · Missing Authorization

Affects Payoneer Checkout (WordPress plugin)Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 15% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Payoneer Inc. Payoneer Checkout	Affected <=3.4.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement the following specific mitigations: 1) Immediately audit and restrict access controls within Payoneer Checkout integrations to ensure proper authorization checks are enforced on all user actions and content modifications. 2) Monitor transaction and user activity logs for anomalous behavior indicative of content manipulation or spoofing attempts. 3) Educate end-users and employees about the risks of content spoofing and train them to recognize suspicious payment prompts or unexpected content during checkout. 4) Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block unauthorized content injection attempts targeting Payoneer Checkout endpoints. 5) Coordinate with Payoneer to obtain patches or updates addressing this vulnerability as soon as they become available and prioritize their deployment. 6) Implement multi-factor authentication (MFA) where possible to reduce the risk of unauthorized access that could facilitate exploitation. 7) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing focused on authorization controls within payment workflows to proactively identify similar weaknesses.

Description

Missing Authorization vulnerability in Payoneer Inc. Payoneer Checkout allows Content Spoofing.This issue affects Payoneer Checkout: from n/a through 3.4.0.

Impact

For European organizations using Payoneer Checkout, this vulnerability could lead to targeted content spoofing attacks during payment transactions. Attackers could manipulate displayed content to deceive users into authorizing fraudulent payments or divulging sensitive information. Although the direct impact on confidentiality and availability is low, the integrity compromise can result in financial fraud, reputational damage, and loss of customer trust. Given the widespread use of Payoneer Checkout among European e-commerce platforms, freelancers, and businesses relying on cross-border payments, this vulnerability could be exploited to disrupt payment workflows and cause financial losses. Additionally, regulatory compliance risks under GDPR may arise if spoofing leads to unauthorized data disclosures or fraudulent transactions. The requirement for user interaction means phishing or social engineering techniques could be leveraged, increasing the risk to end-users.

CWE-862Missing Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #4OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/payoneer-checkout/vulnerability/wordpress-payoneer-checkout-plugin-3-4-0-content-spoofing-vulnerability?_s_id=cve (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Sep 2025, 11:29 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-862

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats