CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-56744NVD status: Deferred

@bsv/wallet-toolbox: Improper Validation of Consistency within Input

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-56744 is a high-severity improper validation of consistency within input vulnerability in @bsv/wallet-toolbox from Bsv-blockchain, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.7 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected @bsv/wallet-toolbox versions: >= 1.1.47, < 2.4.0. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.38% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of @bsv/wallet-toolbox you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Bsv-blockchain@bsv/wallet-toolbox>= 1.1.47, < 2.4.0Not stated
Bsv-blockchain@bsv/wallet-toolbox-client>= 1.1.47, < 2.4.0Not stated
Bsv-blockchain@bsv/wallet-toolbox-mobile>= 1.3.21, < 2.4.0Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Attack requirements
NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
Integrity (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
Availability (vulnerable system)
NoneNo loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
Confidentiality (other systems)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Integrity (other systems)
NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Availability (other systems)
NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.

Vector: 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. Scored by CNA (github.com).

Official 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

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Improper Validation of Consistency within Input

The product receives a complex input with multiple elements or fields that must be consistent with each other, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input is actually consistent.

More Improper Validation of Consistency within Input vulnerabilities (CWE-1288)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Improper Validation of Consistency within Input vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.