GHSA-VX8M-6FHW-PCCW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-08-21 20:13 – Updated: 2023-08-21 20:13Summary
The lack of checking of current timestamp allows a LogoutRequest XML to be reused multiple times even when the current time is past the NotOnOrAfter.
Details
It was noticed that in the validatePostRequestAsync() flow in saml.js, the current timestamp is never checked. This could present a vulnerability where a user who has an XML LogoutRequest could validated it if the IssueInstance and the NotOnOrAfter are valid along with valid credentials (signature, certificate etc.).
PoC
I was able to validate a sample valid LogoutRequest XML multiple times through postman by sending it to my endpoint regardless if the current present time was past the NotOnOrAfter time. After some further testing, it seems that only the IssueInstance is checked against NotOnOrAfter. Not sure if this was the intended behaviour but I believe having a never expiring valid LogoutRequest could be dangerous.
Impact
This could impact the user where they would be logged out from an expired LogoutRequest. In bigger contexts, if LogoutRequests are sent out in mass to different SPs, this could impact many users on a large scale.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@node-saml/node-saml"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.0.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-40178"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-347",
"CWE-613"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-08-21T20:13:05Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-08-23T21:15:08Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThe lack of checking of current timestamp allows a LogoutRequest XML to be reused multiple times even when the current time is past the NotOnOrAfter. \n\n### Details\n\nIt was noticed that in the validatePostRequestAsync() flow in saml.js, the current timestamp is never checked. This could present a vulnerability where a user who has an XML LogoutRequest could validated it if the IssueInstance and the NotOnOrAfter are valid along with valid credentials (signature, certificate etc.). \n\n### PoC\n\nI was able to validate a sample valid LogoutRequest XML multiple times through postman by sending it to my endpoint regardless if the current present time was past the NotOnOrAfter time. After some further testing, it seems that only the IssueInstance is checked against NotOnOrAfter. Not sure if this was the intended behaviour but I believe having a never expiring valid LogoutRequest could be dangerous.\n\n### Impact\n\nThis could impact the user where they would be logged out from an expired LogoutRequest. In bigger contexts, if LogoutRequests are sent out in mass to different SPs, this could impact many users on a large scale.\n",
"id": "GHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw",
"modified": "2023-08-21T20:13:05Z",
"published": "2023-08-21T20:13:05Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/node-saml/node-saml/security/advisories/GHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-40178"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/node-saml/node-saml/commit/045e3b9c54211fdb95f96edf363679845b195cec"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/node-saml/node-saml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/node-saml/node-saml/releases/tag/v4.0.5"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "@node-saml/node-saml\u0027s validatePostRequestAsync does not include checkTimestampsValidityError"
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.