OAuthLib: Token grants can use attacker-supplied client_id for authorization after authenticating a different client
- Published
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Not listed in CISA KEV
- Fix
- Fixed in 4.0.0
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
OAuthLib, a Python library for OAuth request handling, is affected in the client_credentials and Resource Owner Password Credentials token grant flows. An authenticated client could exploit a mismatch between its identity and a supplied client ID so that an application issues tokens with grants or scopes belonging to a different client.
Summarized by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5. Verify details against the original sources.
Read the original description
OAuthLib is an implementation of the OAuth request-signing logic for Python 3.6+. Prior to 4.0.0, the client_credentials and Resource Owner Password Credentials token grant handlers can authenticate request.client as one confidential client while retaining an attacker-supplied request.client_id for validate_grant_type and validate_scopes. A lower-privilege authenticated client can therefore cause grant and scope authorization to use another client's identity when an application validator relies on the documented client_id argument, potentially issuing tokens with unauthorized grants or scopes. Validators that authorize exclusively from request.client may not be affected. This issue is fixed in version 4.0.0.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
Affected versions
- oauthlib oauthlib
fixed in 4.0.0