Descrizioni CVE

The SimpleSAMLphp SAML2 library is a PHP library for SAML2 related functionality. Prior to versions 4.19.3, 4.20.2, 5.0.6, and 6.2.1, the HTTPArtifact::receive() flow can treat an unsigned embedded SAML Response as cryptographically valid for the wrong identity provider. SOAPClient::addSSLValidator() attaches a TLS-based validator to the outer SOAP ArtifactResponse, while the embedded Response receives a validator that delegates to the outer message and is later checked against metadata selected from the embedded response issuer rather than necessarily the artifact issuer. SOAPClient::validateSSL() returns normally when the TLS public key does not match the key being validated, and SAML2\Message::validate() treats a validator call that does not throw as successful. In a multi-IdP federation, a malicious or lower-trust IdP can therefore provide an ArtifactResponse containing an unsigned Response that claims a higher-trust victim IdP as issuer and authenticate as arbitrary users with attacker-chosen assertion attributes, NameID, and session data. This issue is fixed in versions 4.19.3, 4.20.2, 5.0.6, and 6.2.1.

Informazioni CVE

Vulnerabilità correlate

CWE-ID	Nome della vulnerabilità	Source
CWE-295	Improper Certificate Validation The product does not validate, or incorrectly validates, a certificate.

Metriche

Metriche	Punteggio	Gravità	CVSS Vettore	Source
V3.1	8.7	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N More informations Base: Exploitabilty Metrics The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers). Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. High The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component allowing access to component-wide settings and files. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope Metrics The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Changed An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. High There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no impact to availability within the impacted component. Temporal Metrics The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.	security-advisories@github.com