GHSA-6929-8p9f-26jx
SimpleSAMLphp HTTP-Artifact TLS validator confusion allows cross-IdP authentication bypass
Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Packagist | simplesamlphp/saml2 | >= 6.0.0, < 6.2.1 | 6.2.1 |
| Packagist | simplesamlphp/saml2 | >= 5.0.0, < 5.0.6 | 5.0.6 |
| Packagist | simplesamlphp/saml2 | >= 4.20.0, < 4.20.2 | 4.20.2 |
| Packagist | simplesamlphp/saml2-legacy | >= 4.20.0, < 4.20.2 | 4.20.2 |
| Packagist | simplesamlphp/saml2 | < 4.19.3 | 4.19.3 |
| Packagist | simplesamlphp/saml2-legacy | < 4.19.3 | 4.19.3 |
Details
As written in the advisory (Markdown source, shown as plain text).
## Summary
SimpleSAMLphp's HTTP-Artifact receive path can treat an unsigned embedded SAML `Response` as cryptographically valid for the wrong IdP.
In the `HTTPArtifact::receive()` flow, the SOAP `ArtifactResponse` receives a TLS-based validator from `SOAPClient::addSSLValidator()`. The embedded SAML `Response` then receives a validator that delegates signature validation to that outer `ArtifactResponse`. Later, the SP validates the embedded `Response` against metadata selected from the embedded response issuer, not necessarily the artifact issuer.
The critical issue is that `SOAPClient::validateSSL()` returns normally when the TLS public key does not match the key currently being validated. `SAML2\Message::validate()` treats any validator call that does not throw an exception as successful. As a result, an `ArtifactResponse` obtained from one IdP can validate an unsigned embedded SAML `Response` that claims to be issued by a different IdP.
In a multi-IdP/federation deployment where a malicious or lower-trust IdP can issue an HTTP-Artifact response to an SP, this can allow the attacker to authenticate to the SP as arbitrary users from a higher-trust victim IdP.
## Impact
A malicious or lower-trust IdP in the same SP/federation trust set can authenticate to the SP as users from another IdP when HTTP-Artifact is used. The attacker can choose assertion attributes, `NameID`, and session data in the forged unsigned assertion.
This is an authentication bypass and identity-provider impersonation issue. In realistic federations, the security boundary between IdPs matters: a compromised or low-assurance IdP should not be able to mint identities for a high-assurance IdP.
References
External links from the advisory. They lead to third-party sites.