Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-345

Discouraged

Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity

Abstraction: Class · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product does not sufficiently verify the origin or authenticity of data, in a way that causes it to accept invalid data.

1073 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-WX4H-WGR2-66H2

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:30 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:30
VLAI
Details

When SAML authentication is enabled, Juniper Networks Mist Cloud UI might incorrectly handle child elements in SAML responses, allowing a remote attacker to modify a valid SAML response without invalidating its cryptographic signature to bypass SAML authentication security controls. This issue affects all Juniper Networks Mist Cloud UI versions prior to September 2 2020.

Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2020-1677"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-20",
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2020-10-16T21:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "When SAML authentication is enabled, Juniper Networks Mist Cloud UI might incorrectly handle child elements in SAML responses, allowing a remote attacker to modify a valid SAML response without invalidating its cryptographic signature to bypass SAML authentication security controls. This issue affects all Juniper Networks Mist Cloud UI versions prior to September 2 2020.",
  "id": "GHSA-wx4h-wgr2-66h2",
  "modified": "2022-05-24T17:30:52Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:30:52Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-1677"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://kb.juniper.net/JSA11072"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-WXW3-Q3M9-C3JR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-15 17:33 – Updated: 2026-05-15 17:33
VLAI
Summary
Better Auth: OAuth callback accepts mismatched `state` when cookie-backed state storage is used without PKCE
Details

Am I affected?

Users are affected if all of the following are true:

  • The application uses better-auth at a version below 1.6.2 (or @better-auth/sso paired with such a version).
  • betterAuth({ account: { storeStateStrategy } }) is set to "cookie". The default "database" is not affected.
  • The application wires at least one OAuth provider through genericOAuth({ config }) with pkce: false, or it supplies a custom getToken or tokenUrl that does not require the stored codeVerifier. Stock social providers with PKCE on are not affected.
  • The provider returns arbitrary code values to the configured callback URL.

If users are on better-auth@1.6.2 or later, they are not affected.

Fix:

  1. Upgrade to better-auth@1.6.2 or later (current stable is 1.6.10).
  2. If users cannot upgrade, see workarounds below.

Summary

In parseGenericState, the cookie branch decrypted the oauth_state cookie and validated expiry, but did not compare the incoming OAuth state query parameter to the nonce that generateGenericState issued at sign-in. Any callback to /api/auth/oauth2/callback/<providerId> that arrived with a forged state and any code was therefore accepted as long as the browser still held a live oauth_state cookie. With pkce: false (or any getToken path that does not enforce a code-verifier round-trip), an attacker who forced the victim to deliver an attacker-controlled authorization code to the callback would mint a session bound to the attacker's external identity in the victim's browser. Account-linking flows behaved the same way, binding the attacker's external account to an authenticated victim row.

Details

The cookie branch of parseGenericState did not compare the cookie's stored nonce to the incoming state parameter. The database branch (the default) was not affected because the verification row is keyed by state and the lookup itself enforces equality.

The fix re-binds the cookie to the nonce: generateGenericState writes oauthState: state into the encrypted payload before storage, and parseGenericState rejects when parsedData.oauthState !== state. The same primitive covers every caller (generic-oauth, social, account-link, oauth-proxy passthrough, OIDC SSO, SAML relay state).

Patches

Fixed in better-auth@1.6.2 via PR #8949 (commit 9deb7936a, merged 2026-04-09). The cookie branch of parseGenericState now rejects when the encrypted payload's nonce does not match the incoming state parameter; the database branch gained a defense-in-depth equality check.

Workarounds

If users cannot upgrade immediately:

  • Switch storeStateStrategy back to "database" (the default). This closes the cookie-only bypass without a code change.
  • Enable pkce: true on every affected genericOAuth provider. The codeVerifier is the missing primitive that the attacker cannot supply.

Impact

  • Forced-login (CSRF on OAuth callback): the attacker forces the victim's browser into an authenticated session bound to the attacker's external identity, allowing the attacker to observe the victim's actions inside the application.
  • Persistent account linking: account-link flows bind the attacker's external account to the victim's authenticated row, granting persistent access until the link is removed.

Credit

Reported by @Jvr2022 via private advisory disclosure, and by @alavesa (PatchPilots audit) via the public duplicate issue #8897.

Resources

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

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "better-auth"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.6.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-287",
      "CWE-345",
      "CWE-352"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-15T17:33:40Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Am I affected?\n\nUsers are affected if all of the following are true:\n\n- The application uses `better-auth` at a version below `1.6.2` (or `@better-auth/sso` paired with such a version).\n- `betterAuth({ account: { storeStateStrategy } })` is set to `\"cookie\"`. The default `\"database\"` is not affected.\n- The application wires at least one OAuth provider through `genericOAuth({ config })` with `pkce: false`, or it supplies a custom `getToken` or `tokenUrl` that does not require the stored `codeVerifier`. Stock social providers with PKCE on are not affected.\n- The provider returns arbitrary `code` values to the configured callback URL.\n\nIf users are on `better-auth@1.6.2` or later, they are not affected.\n\nFix:\n\n1. Upgrade to `better-auth@1.6.2` or later (current stable is `1.6.10`).\n2. If users cannot upgrade, see workarounds below.\n\n### Summary\n\nIn `parseGenericState`, the cookie branch decrypted the `oauth_state` cookie and validated expiry, but did not compare the incoming OAuth `state` query parameter to the nonce that `generateGenericState` issued at sign-in. Any callback to `/api/auth/oauth2/callback/\u003cproviderId\u003e` that arrived with a forged `state` and any `code` was therefore accepted as long as the browser still held a live `oauth_state` cookie. With `pkce: false` (or any `getToken` path that does not enforce a code-verifier round-trip), an attacker who forced the victim to deliver an attacker-controlled authorization code to the callback would mint a session bound to the attacker\u0027s external identity in the victim\u0027s browser. Account-linking flows behaved the same way, binding the attacker\u0027s external account to an authenticated victim row.\n\n### Details\n\nThe cookie branch of `parseGenericState` did not compare the cookie\u0027s stored nonce to the incoming `state` parameter. The database branch (the default) was not affected because the verification row is keyed by `state` and the lookup itself enforces equality.\n\nThe fix re-binds the cookie to the nonce: `generateGenericState` writes `oauthState: state` into the encrypted payload before storage, and `parseGenericState` rejects when `parsedData.oauthState !== state`. The same primitive covers every caller (`generic-oauth`, social, account-link, oauth-proxy passthrough, OIDC SSO, SAML relay state).\n\n### Patches\n\nFixed in `better-auth@1.6.2` via [PR #8949](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/8949) (commit `9deb7936a`, merged 2026-04-09). The cookie branch of `parseGenericState` now rejects when the encrypted payload\u0027s nonce does not match the incoming `state` parameter; the database branch gained a defense-in-depth equality check.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nIf users cannot upgrade immediately:\n\n- **Switch `storeStateStrategy` back to `\"database\"`** (the default). This closes the cookie-only bypass without a code change.\n- **Enable `pkce: true`** on every affected `genericOAuth` provider. The `codeVerifier` is the missing primitive that the attacker cannot supply.\n\n### Impact\n\n- **Forced-login (CSRF on OAuth callback)**: the attacker forces the victim\u0027s browser into an authenticated session bound to the attacker\u0027s external identity, allowing the attacker to observe the victim\u0027s actions inside the application.\n- **Persistent account linking**: account-link flows bind the attacker\u0027s external account to the victim\u0027s authenticated row, granting persistent access until the link is removed.\n\n### Credit\n\nReported by @Jvr2022 via private advisory disclosure, and by @alavesa (PatchPilots audit) via the public duplicate [issue #8897](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/8897).\n\n### Resources\n\n- [CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/352.html)\n- [CWE-345: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/345.html)\n- [CWE-287: Improper Authentication](https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/287.html)\n- [RFC 6749 \u00a710.12: Cross-Site Request Forgery](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12)\n- [RFC 7636: Proof Key for Code Exchange](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7636)",
  "id": "GHSA-wxw3-q3m9-c3jr",
  "modified": "2026-05-15T17:33:40Z",
  "published": "2026-05-15T17:33:40Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/security/advisories/GHSA-wxw3-q3m9-c3jr"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/8897"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/8949"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/commit/9deb7936aba7931f2db4b460141f476508f11bfd"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Better Auth: OAuth callback accepts mismatched `state` when cookie-backed state storage is used without PKCE"
}

GHSA-X274-9M9R-FM5G

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:30 – Updated: 2025-03-13 17:58
VLAI
Summary
Jenkins does not Verify Checksums for Plugin Files
Details

The Plugins Manager in Jenkins before 1.640 and LTS before 1.625.2 does not verify checksums for plugin files referenced in update site data, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted plugin.

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

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.625.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.626"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.640"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2015-7539"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-03-13T17:58:11Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2016-02-03T18:59:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "The Plugins Manager in Jenkins before 1.640 and LTS before 1.625.2 does not verify checksums for plugin files referenced in update site data, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted plugin.",
  "id": "GHSA-x274-9m9r-fm5g",
  "modified": "2025-03-13T17:58:11Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:30:07Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-7539"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/11479a2cc0a322a6bcd7e65667f3d24aa4d444bb"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/97adb71aa4509f91e408a16ba312e817ec015cf4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/9ec88357a354d8354728cc06e2b8c8b68aee58bf"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/c158648afa8888bc49ac337c973d4e4bc050118e"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/commit/f99cb46e06f394637067730a82f46bddc3567295"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016:0070"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/SECURITY/Jenkins+Security+Advisory+2015-12-09"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2016-0489.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Jenkins does not Verify Checksums for Plugin Files"
}

GHSA-X39V-FRQ9-5HH8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-10-18 06:30 – Updated: 2025-11-04 00:30
VLAI
Details

When the Node.js policy feature checks the integrity of a resource against a trusted manifest, the application can intercept the operation and return a forged checksum to the node's policy implementation, thus effectively disabling the integrity check. Impacts: This vulnerability affects all users using the experimental policy mechanism in all active release lines: 18.x and, 20.x. Please note that at the time this CVE was issued, the policy mechanism is an experimental feature of Node.js.

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

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-38552"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-10-18T04:15:11Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "When the Node.js policy feature checks the integrity of a resource against a trusted manifest, the application can intercept the operation and return a forged checksum to the node\u0027s policy implementation, thus effectively disabling the integrity check.\nImpacts:\nThis vulnerability affects all users using the experimental policy mechanism in all active release lines: 18.x and, 20.x.\nPlease note that at the time this CVE was issued, the policy mechanism is an experimental feature of Node.js.",
  "id": "GHSA-x39v-frq9-5hh8",
  "modified": "2025-11-04T00:30:40Z",
  "published": "2023-10-18T06:30:30Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-38552"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://hackerone.com/reports/2094235"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/3N4NJ7FR4X4FPZUGNTQAPSTVB2HB2Y4A"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/E72T67UPDRXHIDLO3OROR25YAMN4GGW5"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/FNA62Q767CFAFHBCDKYNPBMZWB7TWYVU"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/HT7T2R4MQKLIF4ODV4BDLPARWFPCJ5CZ"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LKYHSZQFDNR7RSA7LHVLLIAQMVYCUGBG"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/X6QXN4ORIVF6XBW4WWFE7VNPVC74S45Y"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20231116-0013"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20241108-0002"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-X3GG-M9C9-95RP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-01-31 00:30 – Updated: 2023-02-07 03:30
VLAI
Details

Snap One Wattbox WB-300-IP-3 versions WB10.9a17 and prior use a proprietary local area network (LAN) protocol that does not verify updates to the device. An attacker could upload a malformed update file to the device and execute arbitrary code.

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

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-22315"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-01-30T22:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Snap One Wattbox WB-300-IP-3 versions WB10.9a17 and prior use a proprietary local area network (LAN) protocol that does not verify updates to the device. An attacker could upload a malformed update file to the device and execute arbitrary code.",
  "id": "GHSA-x3gg-m9c9-95rp",
  "modified": "2023-02-07T03:30:23Z",
  "published": "2023-01-31T00:30:18Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-22315"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ics/advisories/icsa-23-026-03"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-X3M2-F92M-6Q4J

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-10-25 19:00 – Updated: 2022-10-26 12:00
VLAI
Details

A firmware update vulnerability exists in the sysupgrade functionality of Robustel R1510 3.1.16 and 3.3.0. A specially-crafted network packet can lead to arbitrary firmware update. An attacker can send a sequence of requests to trigger this vulnerability.

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

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-34845"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-10-25T17:15:00Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "A firmware update vulnerability exists in the sysupgrade functionality of Robustel R1510 3.1.16 and 3.3.0. A specially-crafted network packet can lead to arbitrary firmware update. An attacker can send a sequence of requests to trigger this vulnerability.",
  "id": "GHSA-x3m2-f92m-6q4j",
  "modified": "2022-10-26T12:00:29Z",
  "published": "2022-10-25T19:00:27Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-34845"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://talosintelligence.com/vulnerability_reports/TALOS-2022-1580"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-X445-F3H2-J279

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-23 14:31 – Updated: 2026-08-13 19:05
VLAI
Summary
Auth.js: OAuth state, nonce, and PKCE check cookies are not bound to the provider that created them
Details

Summary

Auth.js stores the OAuth/OIDC anti-CSRF checks (state, nonce, and the PKCE verifier) in global cookies that are not bound to the provider that created them. On callback, a check value minted during a sign-in started with one provider can satisfy the callback for a different provider, because the stored cookie is not verified against the callback provider's identity (provider id, issuer, client id, or redirect URI). In a multi-provider app that allows account linking while logged in, this provider-confusion / mix-up condition can let an attacker link their account at a second provider to a victim's user.

Am I affected?

You may be affected if all of the following hold:

  • You use next-auth <= 4.24.14 or >= 5.0.0-beta.1, <= 5.0.0-beta.31, or @auth/core <= 0.41.2.
  • You configure multiple OAuth/OIDC providers.
  • You allow users to link additional providers while logged in.
  • At least one configured provider's authorization request is observable by an attacker, and at least one target provider's callback can be satisfied without a PKCE verifier (i.e. it relies only on state or only on nonce).

You are not affected if you use a single OAuth provider, do not allow logged-in account linking, or all providers enforce PKCE.

Impact

  • Account-linking confusion: an attacker can get their account at a target provider linked to the victim's Auth.js user, granting the attacker persistent sign-in to the victim's account through that linked provider.
  • Exploitation requires luring the victim into starting a legitimate same-origin flow; it cannot be performed by cross-site request forgery alone, which reduces practical likelihood.

Patched version

The fix binds the OAuth check cookies to the provider/authorization flow that created them, so a callback cannot consume a check value minted for a different provider. Upgrade to the first releases containing this fix (pending; this advisory will be updated with exact patched versions before publication).

Workarounds

If you cannot upgrade immediately:

  • Enable PKCE (checks: ["pkce"], in addition to state/nonce) on every provider that supports it; PKCE blocks the practical code-swap variant because the attacker cannot observe the relying party's verifier.
  • Avoid offering logged-in account linking across multiple providers where one provider is lower-trust or attacker-observable.
  • Treat events.linkAccount as sensitive: add audit logging, user notification, or out-of-band confirmation so that any unexpected link is visible (defense-in-depth, not a root-cause fix).

Credit

Reported by @Nadav0077. Thank you for the responsible disclosure.

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

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.41.2"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "@auth/core"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.41.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.0.0-beta.31"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "next-auth"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "5.0.0-beta.1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "5.0.0-beta.32"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.24.14"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "next-auth"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.24.15"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-73419"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345",
      "CWE-346",
      "CWE-940"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-23T14:31:51Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-08-12T21:17:41Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nAuth.js stores the OAuth/OIDC anti-CSRF checks (`state`, `nonce`, and the PKCE verifier) in global cookies that are not bound to the provider that created them. On callback, a check value minted during a sign-in started with one provider can satisfy the callback for a different provider, because the stored cookie is not verified against the callback provider\u0027s identity (provider id, issuer, client id, or redirect URI). In a multi-provider app that allows account linking while logged in, this provider-confusion / mix-up condition can let an attacker link their account at a second provider to a victim\u0027s user.\n\n## Am I affected?\n\nYou may be affected if **all** of the following hold:\n\n- You use `next-auth` `\u003c= 4.24.14` or `\u003e= 5.0.0-beta.1, \u003c= 5.0.0-beta.31`, or `@auth/core` `\u003c= 0.41.2`.\n- You configure multiple OAuth/OIDC providers.\n- You allow users to link additional providers while logged in.\n- At least one configured provider\u0027s authorization request is observable by an attacker, and at least one target provider\u0027s callback can be satisfied without a PKCE verifier (i.e. it relies only on `state` or only on `nonce`).\n\nYou are **not** affected if you use a single OAuth provider, do not allow logged-in account linking, or all providers enforce PKCE.\n\n## Impact\n\n- Account-linking confusion: an attacker can get their account at a target provider linked to the victim\u0027s Auth.js user, granting the attacker persistent sign-in to the victim\u0027s account through that linked provider.\n- Exploitation requires luring the victim into starting a legitimate same-origin flow; it cannot be performed by cross-site request forgery alone, which reduces practical likelihood.\n\n## Patched version\n\nThe fix binds the OAuth check cookies to the provider/authorization flow that created them, so a callback cannot consume a check value minted for a different provider. Upgrade to the first releases containing this fix (pending; this advisory will be updated with exact patched versions before publication).\n\n## Workarounds\n\nIf you cannot upgrade immediately:\n\n- Enable PKCE (`checks: [\"pkce\"]`, in addition to `state`/`nonce`) on every provider that supports it; PKCE blocks the practical code-swap variant because the attacker cannot observe the relying party\u0027s verifier.\n- Avoid offering logged-in account linking across multiple providers where one provider is lower-trust or attacker-observable.\n- Treat `events.linkAccount` as sensitive: add audit logging, user notification, or out-of-band confirmation so that any unexpected link is visible (defense-in-depth, not a root-cause fix).\n\n## Credit\n\nReported by @Nadav0077. Thank you for the responsible disclosure.",
  "id": "GHSA-x445-f3h2-j279",
  "modified": "2026-08-13T19:05:32Z",
  "published": "2026-07-23T14:31:51Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/security/advisories/GHSA-x445-f3h2-j279"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-73419"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/pull/13469"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/commit/5bca2399a79ba8d116ca5179b4b1ebcd152e7f05"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/commit/9f7a97fade9b1319bb9ac19fc9828d62e0a2a852"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/releases/tag/@auth/core@0.41.3"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/releases/tag/next-auth@4.24.15"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nextauthjs/next-auth/releases/tag/next-auth@5.0.0-beta.32"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Auth.js: OAuth state, nonce, and PKCE check cookies are not bound to the provider that created them"
}

GHSA-X5C4-2C4M-RFJ5

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-09-30 18:30 – Updated: 2025-09-30 18:30
VLAI
Details

Rapid7 AppSpider Pro versions below 7.5.021 suffer from a project name validation vulnerability, whereby an attacker can change the project name directly in the configuration file to a name that already exists. This issue stems from a lack of effective verification of the uniqueness of project names when editing them outside the application in affected versions. This vulnerability was remediated in version 7.5.021 of the product.

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

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-11195"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-20",
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-09-30T18:15:49Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "Rapid7 AppSpider Pro versions below 7.5.021 suffer from a project name validation vulnerability, whereby an attacker can change the project name directly in the configuration file to a name that already exists. This issue stems from a lack of effective verification of the uniqueness of project names when editing them outside the application in affected versions. This vulnerability was remediated in version 7.5.021 of the product.",
  "id": "GHSA-x5c4-2c4m-rfj5",
  "modified": "2025-09-30T18:30:25Z",
  "published": "2025-09-30T18:30:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-11195"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://docs.rapid7.com/insight/releasenotes-2025sep/#application-security-insightappsec-and-appspider"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-X5H9-FC29-GM85

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-07 00:31 – Updated: 2026-08-07 00:31
VLAI
Details

The RegistrationMagic WordPress plugin before 6.0.9.5 does not compare the verified PayPal capture's amount, currency, payee, or prior use against the registration it is finalising: its server-side check only confirms the capture status is COMPLETED. An unauthenticated attacker can therefore finalise an expensive paid registration with any genuinely-completed low-value capture, and replay a single capture across unlimited registrations because captures are not de-duplicated.

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-2026-15208"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-08-06T22:16:47Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "The RegistrationMagic WordPress plugin before 6.0.9.5 does not compare the verified PayPal capture\u0027s amount, currency, payee, or prior use against the registration it is finalising: its server-side check only confirms the capture status is COMPLETED. An unauthenticated attacker can therefore finalise an expensive paid registration with any genuinely-completed low-value capture, and replay a single capture across unlimited registrations because captures are not de-duplicated.",
  "id": "GHSA-x5h9-fc29-gm85",
  "modified": "2026-08-07T00:31:14Z",
  "published": "2026-08-07T00:31:14Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-15208"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://wpscan.com/vulnerability/b8c75098-41a9-4b24-9f6b-c3144f230cd8"
    }
  ],
  "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-X5Q5-6WVF-2FPQ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:00 – Updated: 2023-09-26 19:09
VLAI
Summary
Magento 2 Community Edition Insufficient Logging
Details

An insufficient logging and monitoring vulnerability exists in Magento 2.1 prior to 2.1.19, Magento 2.2 prior to 2.2.10, Magento 2.3 prior to 2.3.3. Failure to track admin actions related to design configuration could lead to repudiation attacks.

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

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "magento/community-edition"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.1.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.1.19"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "magento/community-edition"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.2.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.2.10"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "magento/community-edition"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "2.3.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.3.3"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2019-8124"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2023-07-18T17:52:47Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2019-11-05T23:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "An insufficient logging and monitoring vulnerability exists in Magento 2.1 prior to 2.1.19, Magento 2.2 prior to 2.2.10, Magento 2.3 prior to 2.3.3. Failure to track admin actions related to design configuration could lead to repudiation attacks.",
  "id": "GHSA-x5q5-6wvf-2fpq",
  "modified": "2023-09-26T19:09:58Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:00:25Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-8124"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/FriendsOfPHP/security-advisories/blob/master/magento/product-community-edition/CVE-2019-8124.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/magento/magento2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://magento.com/security/patches/magento-2.3.3-and-2.2.10-security-update"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://web.archive.org/web/20220121051105/https://magento.com/security/patches/magento-2.3.3-and-2.2.10-security-update"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Magento 2 Community Edition Insufficient Logging"
}

No mitigation information available for this CWE.

CAPEC-111: JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)

An attacker targets a system that uses JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) as a transport mechanism between the client and the server (common in Web 2.0 systems using AJAX) to steal possibly confidential information transmitted from the server back to the client inside the JSON object by taking advantage of the loophole in the browser's Same Origin Policy that does not prohibit JavaScript from one website to be included and executed in the context of another website.

CAPEC-141: Cache Poisoning

An attacker exploits the functionality of cache technologies to cause specific data to be cached that aids the attackers' objectives. This describes any attack whereby an attacker places incorrect or harmful material in cache. The targeted cache can be an application's cache (e.g. a web browser cache) or a public cache (e.g. a DNS or ARP cache). Until the cache is refreshed, most applications or clients will treat the corrupted cache value as valid. This can lead to a wide range of exploits including redirecting web browsers towards sites that install malware and repeatedly incorrect calculations based on the incorrect value.

CAPEC-142: DNS Cache Poisoning

A domain name server translates a domain name (such as www.example.com) into an IP address that Internet hosts use to contact Internet resources. An adversary modifies a public DNS cache to cause certain names to resolve to incorrect addresses that the adversary specifies. The result is that client applications that rely upon the targeted cache for domain name resolution will be directed not to the actual address of the specified domain name but to some other address. Adversaries can use this to herd clients to sites that install malware on the victim's computer or to masquerade as part of a Pharming attack.

CAPEC-148: Content Spoofing

An adversary modifies content to make it contain something other than what the original content producer intended while keeping the apparent source of the content unchanged. The term content spoofing is most often used to describe modification of web pages hosted by a target to display the adversary's content instead of the owner's content. However, any content can be spoofed, including the content of email messages, file transfers, or the content of other network communication protocols. Content can be modified at the source (e.g. modifying the source file for a web page) or in transit (e.g. intercepting and modifying a message between the sender and recipient). Usually, the adversary will attempt to hide the fact that the content has been modified, but in some cases, such as with web site defacement, this is not necessary. Content Spoofing can lead to malware exposure, financial fraud (if the content governs financial transactions), privacy violations, and other unwanted outcomes.

CAPEC-218: Spoofing of UDDI/ebXML Messages

An attacker spoofs a UDDI, ebXML, or similar message in order to impersonate a service provider in an e-business transaction. UDDI, ebXML, and similar standards are used to identify businesses in e-business transactions. Among other things, they identify a particular participant, WSDL information for SOAP transactions, and supported communication protocols, including security protocols. By spoofing one of these messages an attacker could impersonate a legitimate business in a transaction or could manipulate the protocols used between a client and business. This could result in disclosure of sensitive information, loss of message integrity, or even financial fraud.

CAPEC-384: Application API Message Manipulation via Man-in-the-Middle

An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages. Performing this attack can allow the attacker to gain unauthorized privileges within the application, or conduct attacks such as phishing, deceptive strategies to spread malware, or traditional web-application attacks. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to perform adversary-in-the-middle (CAPEC-94) communications between the web browser and the remote system. Despite the use of AiTH software, the attack is actually directed at the server, as the client is one node in a series of content brokers that pass information along to the application framework. Additionally, it is not true "Adversary-in-the-Middle" attack at the network layer, but an application-layer attack the root cause of which is the master applications trust in the integrity of code supplied by the client.

CAPEC-385: Transaction or Event Tampering via Application API Manipulation

An attacker hosts or joins an event or transaction within an application framework in order to change the content of messages or items that are being exchanged. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that look authentic but may contain deceptive links, substitute one item or another, spoof an existing item and conduct a false exchange, or otherwise change the amounts or identity of what is being exchanged. The techniques require use of specialized software that allow the attacker to man-in-the-middle communications between the web browser and the remote system in order to change the content of various application elements. Often, items exchanged in game can be monetized via sales for coin, virtual dollars, etc. The purpose of the attack is for the attack to scam the victim by trapping the data packets involved the exchange and altering the integrity of the transfer process.

CAPEC-386: Application API Navigation Remapping

An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of links/buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains links/buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination. Some applications make navigation remapping more difficult to detect because the actual HREF values of images, profile elements, and links/buttons are masked. One example would be to place an image in a user's photo gallery that when clicked upon redirected the user to an off-site location. Also, traditional web vulnerabilities (such as CSRF) can be constructed with remapped buttons or links. In some cases navigation remapping can be used for Phishing attacks or even means to artificially boost the page view, user site reputation, or click-fraud.

CAPEC-387: Navigation Remapping To Propagate Malicious Content

An adversary manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the content of messages and thereby circumvent the expected application logic.

CAPEC-388: Application API Button Hijacking

An attacker manipulates either egress or ingress data from a client within an application framework in order to change the destination and/or content of buttons displayed to a user within API messages. Performing this attack allows the attacker to manipulate content in such a way as to produce messages or content that looks authentic but contains buttons that point to an attacker controlled destination.

CAPEC-665: Exploitation of Thunderbolt Protection Flaws

An adversary leverages a firmware weakness within the Thunderbolt protocol, on a computing device to manipulate Thunderbolt controller firmware in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the implementation of authorization and verification schemes within Thunderbolt protection mechanisms. Upon gaining physical access to a target device, the adversary conducts high-level firmware manipulation of the victim Thunderbolt controller SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) flash, through the use of a SPI Programing device and an external Thunderbolt device, typically as the target device is booting up. If successful, this allows the adversary to modify memory, subvert authentication mechanisms, spoof identities and content, and extract data and memory from the target device. Currently 7 major vulnerabilities exist within Thunderbolt protocol with 9 attack vectors as noted in the Execution Flow.

CAPEC-701: Browser in the Middle (BiTM)

An adversary exploits the inherent functionalities of a web browser, in order to establish an unnoticed remote desktop connection in the victim's browser to the adversary's system. The adversary must deploy a web client with a remote desktop session that the victim can access.

← Back to the CWE list