Release Notes {#rn-general} =========================== These release notes cover all releases to the production server for the week ending November 6, 2026. Announcements {#rn-announce} ============================ These announcements are for November 6, 2026. SOAP Toolkit Authentication Update {#soap-p12} ============================================== `Cybersource` will no longer support username- and password-based authentication for merchants who use the *SOAP Toolkit key*. You must remove username- and password-based authentication from your SOAP Toolkit integration and transition to certificate-based authentication by these dates: * Test Environment: April 15, 2026 * Production validation test (shock test): September 30, 2026. This applies only to selected merchants. * Production Environment: October 7, 2026 {#soap-p12_ul_hbm_lwq_zjc} Your API requests to ` Cybersource ` will be rejected if you do not implement P12 authentication by the required dates. See the [*P12 Authentication Upgrade for SOAP Toolkit Key Users Migration Guide*.](https://developer.cybersource.com/docs/cybs/en-us/so-p12/migration/all/so/so-p12/so-p12-intro.md "") Batch Upload Service IP Address Updates {#ip-addresses} ======================================================= The legacy IP address for the `Cybersource` Batch Upload service will be replaced by two new IP addresses. We recommend that you use domain names instead of IP addresses. The new addresses will take effect at these URLs and times: **Testing Environment** `batchtest.cybersource.com` July 28, 2026, at 4:00 a.m. UTC **Production Environment:** `batch.cybersource.com` September 15, 2026, at 4:00 a.m. UTC Enhanced Webhook URL Review and Approval Process {#webhooks-urls} ================================================================= We have introduced an enhancement to webhook subscription processing to improve security, compliance, and visibility for webhook-related URLs. Webhook URLs are now validated and reviewed before they can be used. This includes both new subscriptions and existing subscriptions currently on file. **Introduced Changes** {#webhooks-urls_section_dnx_jdt_1jc} ----------------------------------------------------------- When a webhook subscription is created or updated, the URLs associated with that subscription are evaluated through a validation and approval process. Applies to: * Webhook URL (required) * OAuth URL (if applicable) * Health Check URL (if applicable) {#webhooks-urls_ul_enx_jdt_1jc} As part of this enhancement, user-facing statuses have been added: * PENDING_REVIEW * BLOCKED {#webhooks-urls_ul_fnx_jdt_1jc} The existing INACTIVE status remains unchanged and continues to indicate that the subscription is approved and ready within the current lifecycle. Status Descriptions ------------------- | **Status** | **Description** | |:---------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | PENDING_REVIEW | One or more submitted URLs are being validated or awaiting required security approval. | | BLOCKED | One or more URLs were rejected or identified as unsafe or non-compliant. The subscription cannot proceed until the URLs are updated. | | INACTIVE | All required approvals are complete, and the subscription is ready under the existing activation flow. | **How the New Process Works** {#webhooks-urls_section_hnx_jdt_1jc} ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. A webhook subscription is created or updated. 2. Submitted URLs are checked against existing approval records. 3. New or unknown URLs are evaluated through automated validation. 4. If additional review is required, the subscription status changes to PENDING_REVIEW. 5. If any URL is rejected or blocked, the subscription status changes to BLOCKED. 6. If all required URLs are approved, the subscription status changes to INACTIVE. {#webhooks-urls_ol_inx_jdt_1jc} In cases where a subscription status is changed to BLOCKED, merchants are expected to perform these tasks: 7. Review the affected endpoints. 8. Update the URLs to an acceptable endpoint. 9. Resubmit the subscription for processing. {#webhooks-urls_ul_lnx_jdt_1jc} **For New Subscriptions** {#webhooks-urls_section_mnx_jdt_1jc} -------------------------------------------------------------- New webhook-related URLs might go through validation and, if necessary, security review before the subscription can proceed. **Why We Are Making This Change** {#webhooks-urls_section_pnx_jdt_1jc} ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This enhancement provides these benefits: * **Reduce security risk** by preventing outbound calls to unapproved endpoints. * **Improve compliance** through stronger review and approval controls. * **Increase transparency** with clearer merchant-visible statuses. * **Support scale** through a standardized and repeatable validation process. {#webhooks-urls_ul_qnx_jdt_1jc} Message-Level Encryption Upcoming Mandate {#announcement-mle} ============================================================= An updated version of message-level encryption (MLE) will become required in order for merchants to use the APIs. Portfolio owners must enable this updated version of MLE in order for their merchants by **March 1, 2027**. This required MLE update encrypts all data in your API response messages. The previous version of MLE encrypted only request messages. If your merchants are already using custom JSON Web Token messaging, they must also update how their system constructs JWTs. **Merchants who are using HTTP signature messaging must migrate their system to JWT messaging.** > You risk transaction failures if you do not implement this MLE update. Overview of MLE --------------- MLE is a robust security protocol designed to encrypt individual messages or payloads at the application layer. By protecting sensitive data at the message level, MLE ensures that your information remains secure as it moves through systems and networks, providing a layer of security beyond traditional transport encryption. Enabling MLE requires you to create a REST API key for request messages and a *REST -- API Response MLE* key for response messages. If your organization is using a meta key, the portfolio account or merchant account user who created the meta key must also create the REST -- API Response MLE key. Update Methods : * Create or update your custom MLE integration using JWTs with P12 certificates. For more information, see the [Enable Message-Level Encryption](https://developer.cybersource.com/docs/cybs/en-us/platform/developer/all/rest/rest-getting-started/restgs-jwt-message-intro/restgs-mle-intro.md "") section in the *Getting Started with REST Developer Guide* . For a method using shared secret key pairs, see the [HTTP Messaging Migration to JWT Messaging](#announcement-mle_http-messaging-migration "") section. * Update your REST API SDK. For more information, see the *REST API related products* section in the [Cybersource GitHub](https://github.com/CyberSource ""). JSON Web Token Construction Update ---------------------------------- There are new requirements for how to construct JSON Web Tokens (JWTs) to send API request messages. If you use a custom integration to construct JWTs, you must update your system to remain compliant. This update is necessary to support the new MLE requirements. Update Methods : * See [Construct JWT Messages Using a P12 Certificate](https://developer.cybersource.com/docs/cybs/en-us/platform/developer/all/rest/rest-getting-started/restgs-jwt-message-intro/restgs-jwt-const-intro.md "") in the *Getting Started with REST Developer Guide* * See [Construct JWT Messages Using a Shared Secret Key Pair](https://developer.cybersource.com/docs/cybs/en-us/platform/developer/all/rest/rest-getting-started/restgs-jwt-shared-secret-intro/restgs-jwt-con-shared-secret-intro.md "") in the *Getting Started with REST Developer Guide* HTTP Messaging Migration to JWT Messaging {#announcement-mle_http-messaging-migration} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By **March 1, 2027**, all merchants using HTTP signature messaging must migrate to JWT messaging to support MLE. Merchants already using HTTP signature messaging with shared secret key pairs can now continue using their existing keys with JWT messaging. Update Method : * See [Construct JWT Messages Using a Shared Secret Key Pair](https://developer.cybersource.com/docs/cybs/en-us/platform/developer/all/rest/rest-getting-started/restgs-jwt-shared-secret-intro.md "") in the *Getting Started with REST Developer Guide* {#announcement-mle_ul_mkf_nff_1kc} Network Routing Architecture Update {#network-routing-ip-migration} =================================================================== `Cybersource` endpoints will be migrated from the current routing model to a new architecture using updated IP subnet ranges. This enhancement improves the performance, resiliency, and reliability of transaction delivery over the Internet. It will also enable seamless transaction routing across multiple Visa data centers, supporting more consistent and reliable transaction processing. **`Cybersource` Endpoints and IP Addresses Included** Current Application and endpoints: **CAS/Test** : `apitest.cybersource.com` (current IP address: `66.185.182.49`) **Production** : `api.cybersource.com` (current IP address: `66.185.182.149`) **Potential Impact** Merchants who connect to the REST API endpoints (`apitest.cybersource.com` and `api.cybersource.com`) use a Domain Name System (DNS) should not be affected. DNS records will be updated automatically to use the new routing architecture. Merchants with networks configured to allowlist IP addresses or who have hardcoded IP addresses will likely be impacted. These merchants should update proxy or firewall settings to include the new Visa IP address ranges. There are no changes to TLS/SSL certificates or supported ciphers as part of this migration. However, `Cybersource` continues to recommend trusting the root TLS certificates for all secure endpoints. **Migration Timeline** **CAS/Test**: October 15, 2026 **Production**: January 31, 2027 **Now Available** This technology is now available in both the test and production environments through these domains: **CAS/Test** : `apitest.visaacceptance.com` **Production** : `api.visaacceptance.com` Deploying in the CAS/Test Environment provides a safe environment to test and validate access. When testing is complete, you may migrate production processing. **How to Adopt This Change** To use the new routing architecture, your firewall or your commerce platform provider's firewall must be configured to permit outbound traffic to the Visa cloud. This large, dynamic IP address space represents a significant change from current access configurations. Therefore, it is critically important to test firewall configurations and confirm that connections are successful before migrating production traffic. Merchants who require IP address allowlists can use one of these options: **Option 1**: Merchants can add these specific subnet ranges to IP address allowlists: * `198.217.128.0/17` * `198.241.128.0/17` * `66.185.176.0/20` **Option 2**: Merchants can add these generic subnet ranges to IP address allowlists: * `198.241.206.0/24` * `198.241.207.0/24` Secure Acceptance Sunset {#secure-acceptance-sunset} ==================================================== Secure Acceptance is being sunset as part of a move toward web-based payment acceptance solutions. The target date for merchants to complete migration from Secure Acceptance was September 30, 2026. Unified Checkout is available as the recommended migration path. It provides a low-code payment acceptance experience with support for expanded payment options and integrated services. For more details about this change and guidance on how to migrate, see this knowledge base article: [Secure Acceptance Sunset (KA-11531)](https://support.visaacceptance.com/knowledgebase/Knowledgearticle/?code=KA-11531 ""). Review your migration plans and take the necessary steps to move from Secure Acceptance before the deadline. If you need assistance, contact your Visa representative. Transaction Search Performance Update {#trans_search_perform_update} ==================================================================== `Cybersource` is aware of an intermittent issue that impacts transaction search performance. The search functions in the APIs and `Business Center` are served from a shared search platform that is used by all Transaction Management module customers. An issue can occur when there is unusually high search activity, which places a heavy load on the shared search service. `Cybersource` applied traffic controls to reduce the impact and is rolling out additional safeguards to prevent recurrence. This issue does not impact payment processing transactions. To improve transaction search performance and provide more consistent response times, the transaction search platform is being updated for requests that use multiple search identifiers. As part of this enhancement, searches that include multiple identifiers will support up to 15 identifiers per request. Merchants whose integrations currently submit larger batches should update their systems to divide searches into smaller requests. Merchant Impact --------------- * You might occasionally experience slower response times or timeouts. * For API integrators, an HTTP `429` response often indicates that there are too many request responses on Transaction Search, Case Search, or the Find Similar Transactions feature, particularly for large, broad, or long-date-range searches. Recommended Actions ------------------- * Keep multi-value lookups to 15 identifiers or fewer per search. * Use the narrowest date range that answers your question. A period of no more than 7 days is recommended for interactive transaction searches. * Break large bulk lookups into smaller batches instead of using one large combined search. * Avoid broad wildcard searches, especially searches that use a short prefix and an asterisk (\*). * If a search is slow or times out, wait a moment before retrying instead of retrying immediately. * For API integrators: * Limit each request to 15 or fewer identifiers. * Use the narrowest date range your job needs. * Implement back off on timeouts or errors instead of tight-loop retries. * If you receive a `429` response, honor any Retry-After value and reduce your request rate and batch size rather than immediately retrying. * If your workflow repeatedly requires a large multi-identifier or long-date-range search, contact your support or account team so that it can be reviewed for the batch and export path or an appropriate exception. Recommended Next Step --------------------- Review your search and integration patterns and adhere to the guidance provided in the [Best Practices for Implementing Searches](#trans_search_perform_update_best-practices "") section. Best Practices for Implementing Searches {#trans_search_perform_update_best-practices} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These best practices apply to searches that you implement using the Transaction Search API, Case Search API, and the `Business Center`. Following these practices will help keep your searches and detail lookups fast and reliable. General Guidance : * Keep multi-value lookups to 15 identifiers or fewer per search. Identifiers include reference numbers, request IDs, or account numbers. For larger lookups, use another method instead of one very large interactive request. * Use the narrowest date range that answers your question. Use a period of no more than 7 days for interactive transaction searches. * Break large bulk lookups into smaller batches. For example, implement several searches of less than or equal to 15 identifiers and less than or equal to 7 days instead of implementing one combined search that spans many identifiers and a long date range. * Retry failed or slow searches manually, using a short pause instead of immediately re-running the identical search in an automated loop. Practices to Avoid : * Do not implement broad wildcard searches. These searches scan a large portion of the search index and use the most resources. * These wildcard validation rules now apply: * Leading wildcard searches are no longer accepted. * Wildcard searches must contain a minimum of three characters preceding the wildcard character (\*). These examples demonstrate the unsupported and the accepted wildcard formats. Unsupported Wildcard Formats: * \*ABC * A\* * AB\* * 12\* Accepted Wildcard Formats: * ABC\* * ABCD\* * 123\* * Avoid combining a large number of identifiers with a long date range in the same search. Cost increases roughly with identifiers multiplied by a date range, so a search that is fine alone can be expensive when both are large together. * Avoid automated rapid-retry on a timeout. An identical search that timed out will typically time out again if re-run immediately, which adds load on the service without improving results. API Searches: Request Shape : * Cap each request to 15 or fewer identifiers when using multi-value lookups. If your integration currently sends larger batches, split them into multiple smaller requests. * Use an end-of-day reconciliation or bulk report instead of paging through many large interactive search calls. * Use the narrowest date range your job actually needs. Recurring jobs that request a wide window are a common source of avoidable load. * Avoid wildcard or short-prefix values in identifier fields. Search for an exact full value when it is available. API Searches: Retry and Error Handling : * Implement a back-off retry instead of tight-loop retry. If a request times out or errors, wait before retrying, and increase the wait time on repeated failures (exponential back off). * If you receive a `429` (rate limited) response, treat it as a signal to slow down, not a bug to route around. Honor any Retry-After value if present, and reduce your request rate/batch size rather than retrying immediately or in parallel. * Cap your retry attempts for a given request. For example, make 3 to 5 attempts with increasing back-off retries and alert/log instead of retrying indefinitely. * Watch for repeated identical requests from your own systems. A scheduled job that re-issues the exact same search on every run because a previous run did not complete can create a sustained load without your team realizing it. Add job-level locking or de-duplication search so a stopped run does not stack up. `Business Center` Searches : * **Transaction Search:** search on a specific field (order number, request ID, reference number) instead of a broad free-text and keyword term when possible. Keep the date range to 7 days or fewer. * **Quick Search:** use a reasonably narrow date range rather than the widest default. If you manage multiple sub-accounts under a parent account, search from the specific sub-account instead of from the top-level parent view when you know the account where the transaction belongs. * **Bulk Export and Reporting:** if you need a large number of transactions or cases, use the `Business Center` report feature to pull the full set at once instead of repeatedly re-running and paging through search results. If a search is slow or times out, wait a moment and retry once instead of repeatedly clicking search or refresh in quick succession. PHP Runtime Security Update Requirement {#php_run_sec_update_req} ================================================================= Organizations should use a supported PHP runtime version and complete any required updates to help keep their payment environments secure. For more information about this requirement and any necessary actions, follow the link and log in to Business Center to review the PHP Runtime Security Update Requirements knowledge base article: [PHP Runtime Security Update Requirements](https://support.visaacceptance.com/knowledgebase/knowledgearticle/?code=KA-12243 "") Features Introduced This Week {#rn-features} ============================================ No customer-facing features were released this week. Fixed Issues {#rn-fixed-issues} =============================== **Automated Clearing House (ACH) eCheck Follow-On Credit Eligibility Restored** \| RM-49229 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description : This release corrects a defect affecting Automated Clearing House (ACH) eCheck transactions. Sometimes, follow-on credits were incorrectly unavailable because the system could not accurately calculate transaction age when processing request IDs longer than 26 characters. Following this release, merchants can perform eligible follow-on credits for ACH eCheck transactions for up to 180 days after the original debit transaction, consistent with the intended processor rules. Mandate : Does not apply. Audience : Some merchants processing eCheck transactions through an ACH processor. Technical Details : No API changes are required, and no merchant configuration changes are necessary to use this correction. Important Dates : Released on November 4, 2026. Known Issues {#rn-known-issues} =============================== **SDK Upgrade Breaks Some .NET SOAP Requests** \| EPS-44622 ----------------------------------------------------------- Description : Applications using sign-only message security cannot submit Simple Order API requests after upgrading the .NET SOAP SDK from version 1.4.10 to version 1.4.11. Affected requests fail with an identity-check error before they are sent. Audience : Some merchants using version 1.4.11 of the .NET SOAP SDK for the Simple Order API with sign-only message security. Technical Details : Version 1.4.11 incorrectly applies an identity-verification check to sign-only connections. As a result, the SDK can throw `System.ServiceModel.Security.MessageSecurityException` with an *Identity check failed for outgoing message* message before submitting the request. Workaround : Continue using version 1.4.10 of the .NET SOAP SDK until a corrected version is available. **Some Transaction Details Pages Do Not Load** \| EPS-46021 ----------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some transactions appear in Transaction Search, but their Transaction Details pages display *Unable to Load Transaction Data*. The transaction data remains available in the underlying system. Audience : Some Cybersource users viewing transactions with unusually large linked transaction histories. Technical Details : The Transaction Details page can time out while retrieving and assembling a transaction history containing an exceptionally large number of related attempts. This issue does not indicate that the transaction data is missing. Workaround : Use Transaction Search to view the available transaction summary. Contact Customer Support if the complete transaction history is required. **Some Successful Authorizations Return System Errors** \| EPS-46070 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some successful payment authorizations can return an HTTP `500` response with `SYSTEM_ERROR`. The authorization might still appear as successful in Transaction Management. Audience : Some merchants submitting payment authorization requests through the REST API. Technical Details : This issue occurs when the authorization succeeds but the returned decision code is not recognized during API response transformation. The successful backend result is then replaced with a system-error response. Workaround : Before retrying an affected authorization, use Transaction Management or the Transaction Search API to verify whether the original request succeeded. **Some Payer Authentication Updates Appear Successful** \| EPS-46075 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some UnionPay Payer Authentication configuration updates can appear successful after an earlier update was rejected. A subsequent attempt can report that no changes were submitted even though the configuration was not accepted by the authentication service. Audience : Some merchants configuring UnionPay Payer Authentication through Business Center or the Payer Authentication configuration API. Technical Details : When an update to the default-currency configuration is rejected, the submitted acquirer information can still be stored in the local Payer Authentication profile. Retrying the same update can then return a successful *No changes in request* response without resubmitting the configuration for validation. Workaround : No known workaround. **Some eCheck Billing States Are Incorrect** \| EPS-46119 --------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some eCheck transactions processed through Unified Checkout can contain an incorrect billing state when billing-address collection is disabled. For affected US addresses, Unified Checkout can replace the submitted state with `AL`. Audience : Some US merchants accepting eCheck payments through Unified Checkout. Technical Details : This issue occurs when Billing Address is disabled and the capture mandate does not require billing-address collection. Under these conditions, the submitted value in `orderInformation.billTo.administrativeArea` might not be preserved. Workaround : In Cybersource, enable **Billing Address** under **Payment Configuration \> Unified Checkout \> Customer Information and Payment Flow** , and select **Zip only** or **Full address**. **Some Authorizations Include Conflicting Exemptions** \| EPS-46258 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some authorization requests can be declined when a Payer Authentication outage occurs and another Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) exemption is already present. Affected requests return reason code `102` and indicate that only one SCA exemption can be submitted per authorization. Audience : Some merchants using Payer Authentication and SCA exemptions in Europe. Technical Details : During some directory-server outages, the Payer Authentication response can add an outage exemption without recognizing an existing exemption. The authorization request is then declined because it contains more than one SCA exemption. Workaround : No known workaround. **Some Report Events Display in One Row** \| EPS-46426 ------------------------------------------------------ Description : Some Processor Events Detail Reports display multiple processor events as comma-separated values in a single report row. The underlying event records and amounts remain correct. Audience : Some merchants using Processor Events Detail Reports. Technical Details : This issue occurs when a transaction has more than one processor event in the selected report period. The report combines the events into one row instead of displaying each event separately. Workaround : No known workaround. **Some PayPal References Are Not Preserved** \| EPS-46577 --------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some merchants submitting custom reconciliation references for PayPal order, capture, or session requests receive system-generated references instead. As a result, merchants might be unable to use their submitted values to reconcile affected PayPal transactions. Audience : Some merchants using PayPal through alternative payments and submitting custom reconciliation references. Technical Details : Values submitted in `processingInformation.reconciliationId` or `orderInformation.invoiceDetails.invoiceNumber` are not included in affected PayPal order, capture, and session requests. PayPal refund requests preserve the submitted reference correctly. Workaround : No known workaround. **Some Payer Authentication Validations Fail** \| EPS-46646 ----------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some merchants using hybrid Payer Authentication receive an authentication failure when validating successful 3-D Secure authentication results. Affected requests return reason code `479` and the message *Unable to validate response access token.* Audience : Some merchants using hybrid Payer Authentication in Europe. Technical Details : The affected validation flow does not recognize the JSON Web Token (JWT) issuer used for some migrated Payer Authentication sessions. As a result, a successful authentication result can fail validation when `responseAccessToken` is submitted. Workaround : No known workaround. **Some Payer Authentication Activations Fail** \| EPS-46739 ----------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some newly onboarded merchants cannot enable 3-D Secure Payer Authentication through Cybersource or API Onboarding. Activation fails and can incorrectly indicate that the merchant has already been created. Audience : Some newly onboarded merchants enabling 3-D Secure Payer Authentication through Cybersource or API Onboarding. Technical Details : A newly created Payer Authentication profile might not be available when the system immediately attempts to use it as the merchant's default profile. The activation request then fails even though the new profile was created successfully. Workaround : Contact Customer Support to complete Payer Authentication profile generation and synchronization for the affected merchant. **Some E-Commerce Transactions Rejected during Clearing** \| EPS-46911 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Description : Some Mastercard e-commerce transactions using 3-D Secure authentication are incorrectly classified as manually entered transactions and rejected during clearing. Audience : Some merchants processing Mastercard e-commerce transactions through an affected processing connection in the US. Technical Details : Affected sale and credit authorization messages do not include the required e-commerce classification and authentication information in ISO Field 63. As a result, transactions can receive Mastercard International Payment Management rejection code `8679` during clearing even when authorization completes successfully. Workaround : No known workaround.