CVE-2026-53425 (GCVE-0-2026-53425)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-08-20 17:26
Modified
2026-08-21 19:50
Severity ?
VLAI Severity ?
EPSS score ?
CWE
- CWE-345 - Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity
Summary
Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.
Samly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3 in lib/samly/sp_handler.ex validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the RelayState value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares SubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo against the ID of the AuthnRequest the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose InResponseTo does not match a request it made. The underlying esaml library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects InResponseTo, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a RelayState matching the victim's session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.
This issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward.
References
| URL | Tags | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||
Impacted products
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-53425",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "no"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-08-21T19:50:24.245049Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-21T19:50:34.320Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"collectionURL": "https://repo.hex.pm",
"cpes": [
"cpe:2.3:a:dropbox:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
],
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027"
],
"packageName": "samly",
"packageURL": "pkg:hex/samly",
"product": "samly",
"programFiles": [
"lib/samly/sp_handler.ex"
],
"programRoutines": [
{
"name": "\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027:consume_signin_response/1"
}
],
"repo": "https://github.com/dropbox/samly",
"vendor": "dropbox",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "*",
"status": "affected",
"version": "0.3.0",
"versionType": "semver"
}
]
},
{
"collectionURL": "https://github.com",
"cpes": [
"cpe:2.3:a:dropbox:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
],
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027"
],
"packageName": "dropbox/samly",
"packageURL": "pkg:github/dropbox/samly",
"product": "samly",
"programFiles": [
"lib/samly/sp_handler.ex"
],
"programRoutines": [
{
"name": "\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027:consume_signin_response/1"
}
],
"repo": "https://github.com/dropbox/samly",
"vendor": "dropbox",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "*",
"status": "affected",
"version": "8a5bb1b4a4753d05470da2036323477f63cfdf4c",
"versionType": "git"
}
]
},
{
"collectionURL": "https://github.com",
"cpes": [
"cpe:2.3:a:handnot2:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
],
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"modules": [
"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027"
],
"packageName": "handnot2/samly",
"packageURL": "pkg:github/handnot2/samly",
"product": "samly",
"programFiles": [
"lib/samly/sp_handler.ex"
],
"programRoutines": [
{
"name": "\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027:consume_signin_response/1"
}
],
"repo": "https://github.com/handnot2/samly",
"vendor": "handnot2",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "*",
"status": "affected",
"version": "8a5bb1b4a4753d05470da2036323477f63cfdf4c",
"versionType": "git"
}
]
}
],
"cpeApplicability": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:dropbox:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionStartIncluding": "0.3.0",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:handnot2:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"versionStartIncluding": "0.3.0",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
],
"operator": "AND"
}
],
"credits": [
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "reporter",
"value": "Mark Madsen"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"type": "coordinator",
"value": "Jonatan M\u00e4nnchen / EEF"
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"supportingMedia": [
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/html",
"value": "\u003cp\u003eInsufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003ccode\u003eSamly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3\u003c/code\u003e in \u003ccode\u003elib/samly/sp_handler.ex\u003c/code\u003e validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the \u003ccode\u003eRelayState\u003c/code\u003e value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares \u003ccode\u003eSubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo\u003c/code\u003e against the ID of the \u003ccode\u003eAuthnRequest\u003c/code\u003e the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose \u003ccode\u003eInResponseTo\u003c/code\u003e does not match a request it made. The underlying \u003ccode\u003eesaml\u003c/code\u003e library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects \u003ccode\u003eInResponseTo\u003c/code\u003e, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a \u003ccode\u003eRelayState\u003c/code\u003e matching the victim\u0027s session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward.\u003c/p\u003e"
},
{
"base64": false,
"type": "text/markdown",
"value": "Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.\n\n`Samly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3` in `lib/samly/sp_handler.ex` validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the `RelayState` value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares `SubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo` against the ID of the `AuthnRequest` the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose `InResponseTo` does not match a request it made. The underlying `esaml` library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects `InResponseTo`, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a `RelayState` matching the victim\u0027s session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.\n\nThis issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward."
}
],
"value": "Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.\n\nSamly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3 in lib/samly/sp_handler.ex validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the RelayState value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares SubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo against the ID of the AuthnRequest the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose InResponseTo does not match a request it made. The underlying esaml library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects InResponseTo, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a RelayState matching the victim\u0027s session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.\n\nThis issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward."
}
],
"impacts": [
{
"capecId": "CAPEC-62",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CAPEC-62 Cross Site Request Forgery"
}
]
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
"Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 7.6,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
"userInteraction": "PASSIVE",
"valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
},
"format": "CVSS",
"scenarios": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "GENERAL"
}
]
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-345",
"description": "CWE-345 Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-20T18:38:13.727Z",
"orgId": "6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db",
"shortName": "EEF"
},
"references": [
{
"tags": [
"related",
"third-party-advisory"
],
"url": "https://cna.erlef.org/cves/CVE-2026-53425.html"
},
{
"tags": [
"related"
],
"url": "https://osv.dev/vulnerability/EEF-CVE-2026-53425"
}
],
"source": {
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "Missing InResponseTo validation in Samly allows acceptance of unsolicited SAML responses"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db",
"assignerShortName": "EEF",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-53425",
"datePublished": "2026-08-20T17:26:35.537Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-06-09T11:01:47.529Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-08-21T19:50:34.320Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-53425\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"no\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"total\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-08-21T19:50:24.245049Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-21T19:50:30.104Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"Missing InResponseTo validation in Samly allows acceptance of unsolicited SAML responses\", \"source\": {\"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"credits\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"reporter\", \"value\": \"Mark Madsen\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"coordinator\", \"value\": \"Jonatan M\\u00e4nnchen / EEF\"}], \"impacts\": [{\"capecId\": \"CAPEC-62\", \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"CAPEC-62 Cross Site Request Forgery\"}]}], \"metrics\": [{\"format\": \"CVSS\", \"cvssV4_0\": {\"Safety\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"version\": \"4.0\", \"Recovery\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"baseScore\": 7.6, \"Automatable\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"HIGH\", \"valueDensity\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N\", \"providerUrgency\": \"NOT_DEFINED\", \"userInteraction\": \"PASSIVE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"attackRequirements\": \"PRESENT\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"subIntegrityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnIntegrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"subAvailabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnAvailabilityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"subConfidentialityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnConfidentialityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"vulnerabilityResponseEffort\": \"NOT_DEFINED\"}, \"scenarios\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"GENERAL\"}]}], \"affected\": [{\"cpes\": [\"cpe:2.3:a:dropbox:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\"], \"repo\": \"https://github.com/dropbox/samly\", \"vendor\": \"dropbox\", \"modules\": [\"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027\"], \"product\": \"samly\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"0.3.0\", \"lessThan\": \"*\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}], \"packageURL\": \"pkg:hex/samly\", \"packageName\": \"samly\", \"programFiles\": [\"lib/samly/sp_handler.ex\"], \"collectionURL\": \"https://repo.hex.pm\", \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\", \"programRoutines\": [{\"name\": \"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027:consume_signin_response/1\"}]}, {\"cpes\": [\"cpe:2.3:a:dropbox:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\"], \"repo\": \"https://github.com/dropbox/samly\", \"vendor\": \"dropbox\", \"modules\": [\"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027\"], \"product\": \"samly\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"8a5bb1b4a4753d05470da2036323477f63cfdf4c\", \"lessThan\": \"*\", \"versionType\": \"git\"}], \"packageURL\": \"pkg:github/dropbox/samly\", \"packageName\": \"dropbox/samly\", \"programFiles\": [\"lib/samly/sp_handler.ex\"], \"collectionURL\": \"https://github.com\", \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\", \"programRoutines\": [{\"name\": \"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027:consume_signin_response/1\"}]}, {\"cpes\": [\"cpe:2.3:a:handnot2:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\"], \"repo\": \"https://github.com/handnot2/samly\", \"vendor\": \"handnot2\", \"modules\": [\"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027\"], \"product\": \"samly\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"8a5bb1b4a4753d05470da2036323477f63cfdf4c\", \"lessThan\": \"*\", \"versionType\": \"git\"}], \"packageURL\": \"pkg:github/handnot2/samly\", \"packageName\": \"handnot2/samly\", \"programFiles\": [\"lib/samly/sp_handler.ex\"], \"collectionURL\": \"https://github.com\", \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\", \"programRoutines\": [{\"name\": \"\u0027Elixir.Samly.SPHandler\u0027:consume_signin_response/1\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://cna.erlef.org/cves/CVE-2026-53425.html\", \"tags\": [\"related\", \"third-party-advisory\"]}, {\"url\": \"https://osv.dev/vulnerability/EEF-CVE-2026-53425\", \"tags\": [\"related\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.\\n\\nSamly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3 in lib/samly/sp_handler.ex validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the RelayState value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares SubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo against the ID of the AuthnRequest the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose InResponseTo does not match a request it made. The underlying esaml library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects InResponseTo, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a RelayState matching the victim\u0027s session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.\\n\\nThis issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward.\", \"supportingMedia\": [{\"type\": \"text/html\", \"value\": \"\u003cp\u003eInsufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.\u003c/p\u003e\\n\u003cp\u003e\u003ccode\u003eSamly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3\u003c/code\u003e in \u003ccode\u003elib/samly/sp_handler.ex\u003c/code\u003e validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the \u003ccode\u003eRelayState\u003c/code\u003e value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares \u003ccode\u003eSubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo\u003c/code\u003e against the ID of the \u003ccode\u003eAuthnRequest\u003c/code\u003e the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose \u003ccode\u003eInResponseTo\u003c/code\u003e does not match a request it made. The underlying \u003ccode\u003eesaml\u003c/code\u003e library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects \u003ccode\u003eInResponseTo\u003c/code\u003e, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a \u003ccode\u003eRelayState\u003c/code\u003e matching the victim\u0027s session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.\u003c/p\u003e\\n\u003cp\u003eThis issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward.\u003c/p\u003e\", \"base64\": false}, {\"type\": \"text/markdown\", \"value\": \"Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity vulnerability in dropbox samly allows an attacker to establish an authenticated session using a SAML response the service provider never requested.\\n\\n`Samly.SPHandler.validate_authresp/3` in `lib/samly/sp_handler.ex` validates a SAML response for the SP-initiated flow by comparing only the `RelayState` value, the IdP identifier, and the presence of a target URL held in the session. It never compares `SubjectConfirmationData/@InResponseTo` against the ID of the `AuthnRequest` the service provider issued, and that request ID is never persisted, so no comparison is possible. SAML 2.0 Core section 4.1.4.3 requires a service provider to reject a response whose `InResponseTo` does not match a request it made. The underlying `esaml` library checks status, signature, recipient, audience, and staleness, but likewise never inspects `InResponseTo`, so nothing else closes the gap. Exploitation requires a validly signed assertion from the trusted IdP, which an attacker can obtain for their own account, and a `RelayState` matching the victim\u0027s session; the assertion signature itself remains intact, so this is not a signature-forgery issue.\\n\\nThis issue affects samly: from 0.3.0 onward.\", \"base64\": false}]}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-345\", \"description\": \"CWE-345 Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity\"}]}], \"cpeApplicability\": [{\"nodes\": [{\"negate\": false, \"cpeMatch\": [{\"criteria\": \"cpe:2.3:a:dropbox:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\", \"vulnerable\": true, \"versionStartIncluding\": \"0.3.0\"}, {\"criteria\": \"cpe:2.3:a:handnot2:samly:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\", \"vulnerable\": true, \"versionStartIncluding\": \"0.3.0\"}], \"operator\": \"OR\"}], \"operator\": \"AND\"}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db\", \"shortName\": \"EEF\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-20T18:38:13.727Z\"}}}",
"cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-53425\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-21T19:50:34.320Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-06-09T11:01:47.529Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"6b3ad84c-e1a6-4bf7-a703-f496b71e49db\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-08-20T17:26:35.537Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"EEF\"}",
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
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.
Loading…
Loading…