Skip to main content
VulnerabilityPublished

CVE-2026-119731: Petpooja Munshi · Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

Affects Petpooja MunshiSource CVE Database V5

0
Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High.

Data as of 2 Nov 2026, 19:13 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score
8.7High
How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Thin evidence

One scorer or none
CVSS scores by source
CNA (VulnCheck)CVSS 4.08.7
CNA (VulnCheck)CVSS 3.17.5
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

Exploitation evidence

  1. Disclosed: evidence found.

    CVE published 2 Nov 2026

  2. Detectable: no evidence on record.

    No public nuclei template indexed

  3. Weaponized: no evidence on record.

    No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB

  4. Exploited in the wild: no evidence on record.

    Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation

  5. Observed by OffSeq 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 2 Nov 2026.

What to do

Affected software

ProductAffectedFixed in
PetpoojaMunshiAffected
  • <=2026-06-30
Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Until a fix is available, users should consider implementing additional verification controls on the webhook endpoint, such as validating payment notifications with the payment provider independently and enforcing cryptographic signature checks if possible.

Description

Munshi by Petpooja before 2026-06-30 has a payment bypass vulnerability in its subscription payment webhook endpoint. The webhook at POST /api/payment/order/webhook lacks authentication, cryptographic signature verification, source validation, and server-side confirmation with the payment provider. This allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to forge payment-success notifications, causing the system to mark subscriptions as paid without actual payment.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…