ghsa-x4h9-gwv3-r4m4
Vulnerability from github
Published
2025-12-08 22:03
Modified
2025-12-12 21:52
Severity ?
9.3 (Critical) - CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Summary
Ruby-saml allows a Libxml2 Canonicalization error to bypass Digest/Signature validation
Details

Summary

Ruby-saml up to and including 1.12.4, there is an authentication bypass vulnerability because of an issue at libxml2 canonicalization process used by Nokogiri for document transformation. That allows an attacker to be able to execute a Signature Wrapping attack. The vulnerability does not affect the version 1.18.0.

Details

When libxml2’s canonicalization is invoked on an invalid XML input, it may return an empty string rather than a canonicalized node. ruby-saml then proceeds to compute the DigestValue over this empty string, treating it as if canonicalization succeeded.

Impact

  1. Digest bypass: By crafting input that causes canonicalization to yield an empty string, the attacker can manipulate validation to pass incorrectly.

  2. Signature replay on empty canonical form: If an empty string has been signed once (e.g., in a prior interaction or via a misconfigured flow), that signature can potentially be replayed to bypass authentication.

Show details on source website

To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "RubyGems",
        "name": "ruby-saml"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.18.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-66568"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-12-08T22:03:19Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-12-09T16:18:21Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nRuby-saml up to and including 1.12.4, there is an authentication bypass vulnerability because of an issue at libxml2 canonicalization process used by Nokogiri for document transformation. That allows an attacker to be able to execute a Signature Wrapping attack. The vulnerability does not affect the version 1.18.0.\n\n### Details\nWhen libxml2\u2019s canonicalization is invoked on an invalid XML input, it may return an empty string rather than a canonicalized node. ruby-saml then proceeds to compute the DigestValue over this empty string, treating it as if canonicalization succeeded.\n\n### Impact\n1. Digest bypass: By crafting input that causes canonicalization to yield an empty string, the attacker can manipulate validation to pass incorrectly.\n\n2. Signature replay on empty canonical form: If an empty string has been signed once (e.g., in a prior interaction or via a misconfigured flow), that signature can potentially be replayed to bypass authentication.",
  "id": "GHSA-x4h9-gwv3-r4m4",
  "modified": "2025-12-12T21:52:40Z",
  "published": "2025-12-08T22:03:19Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/security/advisories/GHSA-x4h9-gwv3-r4m4"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-66568"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/commit/acac9e9cc0b9a507882c614f25d41f8b47be349a"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rubysec/ruby-advisory-db/blob/master/gems/ruby-saml/CVE-2025-66568.yml"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Ruby-saml allows a Libxml2 Canonicalization error to bypass Digest/Signature validation"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.