CVE-2026-82750

Unbounded EIP-7702 authorization list in mpp Tempo fee-payer sponsorship inflates gas cost and sponsors account delegation

HIGH
8.3
CVSS Score
Published: September 6, 2026 at 04:08 PM UTC
Updated: September 8, 2026 at 07:20 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorMachine Payments Protocol

Using mpp by ZenHive?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect mpp - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH8.3
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.5%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input in ZenHive mpp allows an unauthenticated remote client to inflate the fee-payer's gas cost per sponsored payment by a large multiplier and to have the sponsor pay for EIP-7702 account delegations of the client's choosing. When the server sponsors Tempo payments, MPP.Methods.Tempo.FeePayerPolicy.measure/3 in lib/mpp/methods/tempo/fee_payer_policy.ex bounds the gas fields, the fee budget, the validity window and the access list of the client-signed 0x76 envelope, but never reads its aa_authorization_list field. Every signed delegation in that list is charged as intrinsic gas before the payment call runs, so a client attaching delegations from throwaway authority keys makes the sponsor pay for them within the default gas_limit ceiling. At the reporter's default of seven entries the sponsored cost rises from about 46,575 gas to about 1,884,087 gas. Because each entry is applied as a persistent set-code delegation, a client can also upgrade its own accounts to delegated code at the sponsor's expense. This issue affects mpp: from 0.2.0 before 0.16.1.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

0.2.0 ≤ v < 0.16.10.2.0d29d54e507918db00a5b65d90136b73166c017d7
Vendor states this is fixed in 0482572b47e1ffe1537ab80ab613d47b92833c2d (fixed)
Affected range stops below 0.16.1, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

8.3HIGHEEF
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusDEFERRED
CWE
CWE-1284

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card