Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-308

Allowed

Use of Single-factor Authentication

Abstraction: Base · Status: Draft

API response cwe.mitre.org

The product uses an authentication algorithm that uses a single factor (e.g., a password) in a security context that should require more than one factor.

35 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

CVE-2025-64103 (GCVE-0-2025-64103)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-10-29 18:43 – Updated: 2025-10-30 14:51
VLAI
Title
Zitadel Bypass Second Authentication Factor
Summary
Starting from 2.53.6, 2.54.3, and 2.55.0, Zitadel only required multi factor authentication in case the login policy has either enabled requireMFA or requireMFAForLocalUsers. If a user has set up MFA without this requirement, Zitadel would consider single factor auhtenticated sessions as valid as well and not require multiple factors. Bypassing second authentication factors weakens multifactor authentication and enables attackers to bypass the more secure factor. An attacker can target the TOTP code alone, only six digits, bypassing password verification entirely and potentially compromising accounts with 2FA enabled. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.6.0, 3.4.3, and 2.71.18.
Severity
8.7 (High)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: yes Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2025-10-30 14:51 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
  • CWE-287 - Improper Authentication
Assigner
GitHub_M CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard C 72/100 over 7613 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
zitadel zitadel Affected: >= 4.0.0-rc.1, < 4.6.0
Affected: >= 3.0.0-rc.1, < 3.4.3
Affected: >= 2.55.0, < 2.71.18
Affected: >= 2.54.3, <= 2.54.10
Affected: >= 2.53.6, <= 2.53.9
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2025-64103",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "yes"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-10-30T14:51:11.506264Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-10-30T14:51:19.189Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "zitadel",
          "vendor": "zitadel",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 4.0.0-rc.1, \u003c 4.6.0"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 3.0.0-rc.1, \u003c 3.4.3"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 2.55.0, \u003c 2.71.18"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 2.54.3, \u003c= 2.54.10"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 2.53.6, \u003c= 2.53.9"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "Starting from 2.53.6, 2.54.3, and 2.55.0, Zitadel only required multi factor authentication in case the login policy has either enabled requireMFA or requireMFAForLocalUsers. If a user has set up MFA without this requirement, Zitadel would consider single factor auhtenticated sessions as valid as well and not require multiple factors. Bypassing second authentication factors weakens multifactor authentication and enables attackers to bypass the more secure factor. An attacker can target the TOTP code alone, only six digits, bypassing password verification entirely and potentially compromising accounts with 2FA enabled. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.6.0, 3.4.3, and 2.71.18."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 8.7,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308: Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-287",
              "description": "CWE-287: Improper Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-10-29T20:42:41.527Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/security/advisories/GHSA-cfjq-28r2-4jv5",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/security/advisories/GHSA-cfjq-28r2-4jv5"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/commit/b284f8474eed0cba531905101619e7ae7963156b",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/commit/b284f8474eed0cba531905101619e7ae7963156b"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-cfjq-28r2-4jv5",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Zitadel Bypass Second Authentication Factor"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2025-64103",
    "datePublished": "2025-10-29T18:43:46.934Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-10-27T15:26:14.127Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-10-30T14:51:19.189Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2025-42959 (GCVE-0-2025-42959)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-07-08 00:35 – Updated: 2026-02-26 18:27
VLAI
Title
Missing Authentication check after implementation of SAP Security Note 3007182 and 3537476
Summary
An unauthenticated attacker may exploit a scenario where a Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) credential, extracted from a system missing specific security patches, is reused in a replay attack against a different system. Even if the target system is fully patched, successful exploitation could result in complete system compromise, affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Severity
8.1 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2025-07-11 03:55 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
Assigner
sap CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard C 65/100 over 117 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
SAP_SE SAP NetWeaver ABAP Server and ABAP Platform Affected: SAP_BASIS 700
Affected: SAP_BASIS 701
Affected: SAP_BASIS 702
Affected: SAP_BASIS 731
Affected: SAP_BASIS 740
Affected: SAP_BASIS 750
Affected: SAP_BASIS 751
Affected: SAP_BASIS 752
Affected: SAP_BASIS 753
Affected: SAP_BASIS 754
Affected: SAP_BASIS 755
Affected: SAP_BASIS 756
Affected: SAP_BASIS 757
Affected: SAP_BASIS 758
Affected: SAP_BASIS 914
Affected: SAP_BASIS 915
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2025-42959",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-07-11T03:55:26.171782Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-02-26T18:27:53.365Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "SAP NetWeaver ABAP Server and ABAP Platform",
          "vendor": "SAP_SE",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 700"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 701"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 702"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 731"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 740"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 750"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 751"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 752"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 753"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 754"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 755"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 756"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 757"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 758"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 914"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "SAP_BASIS 915"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "\u003cp\u003eAn unauthenticated attacker may exploit a scenario where a Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) credential, extracted from a system missing specific security patches, is reused in a replay attack against a different system. Even if the target system is fully patched, successful exploitation could result in complete system compromise, affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability.\u003c/p\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "An unauthenticated attacker may exploit a scenario where a Hashed Message Authentication Code (HMAC) credential, extracted from a system missing specific security patches, is reused in a replay attack against a different system. Even if the target system is fully patched, successful exploitation could result in complete system compromise, affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 8.1,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308: Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "eng",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-07-08T00:35:03.181Z",
        "orgId": "e4686d1a-f260-4930-ac4c-2f5c992778dd",
        "shortName": "sap"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://me.sap.com/notes/3600846"
        },
        {
          "url": "https://url.sap/sapsecuritypatchday"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Missing Authentication check after implementation of SAP Security Note 3007182 and 3537476",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "e4686d1a-f260-4930-ac4c-2f5c992778dd",
    "assignerShortName": "sap",
    "cveId": "CVE-2025-42959",
    "datePublished": "2025-07-08T00:35:03.181Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-04-16T13:25:39.584Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-02-26T18:27:53.365Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2024-47652 (GCVE-0-2024-47652)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2024-10-04 12:13 – Updated: 2024-10-04 14:12
VLAI
Title
Insecure Authentication Vulnerability
Summary
This vulnerability exists in Shilpi Client Dashboard due to implementation of inadequate authentication mechanism in the login module wherein access to any users account is granted with just their corresponding mobile number. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by providing mobile number of targeted user, to obtain complete access to the targeted user account.
Severity
7.6 (High)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: total
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2024-10-04 14:11 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
Assigner
CERT-In CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard B 89/100 over 22 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
Shilpi Computers Client Dashboard Affected: <9.7.0
Create a notification for this product.
shilpisoft client_dashboard Affected: 0 , < 9.7.0 (custom)
    cpe:2.3:a:shilpisoft:client_dashboard:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Credits
This vulnerability is reported by Mohit Gadiya.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "affected": [
          {
            "cpes": [
              "cpe:2.3:a:shilpisoft:client_dashboard:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
            ],
            "defaultStatus": "unknown",
            "product": "client_dashboard",
            "vendor": "shilpisoft",
            "versions": [
              {
                "lessThan": "9.7.0",
                "status": "affected",
                "version": "0",
                "versionType": "custom"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2024-47652",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2024-10-04T14:11:18.349369Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-10-04T14:12:13.841Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Client Dashboard",
          "vendor": "Shilpi Computers",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c9.7.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "finder",
          "value": "This vulnerability is reported by Mohit Gadiya."
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "This vulnerability exists in Shilpi Client Dashboard due to implementation of inadequate authentication mechanism in the login module wherein access to any users account is granted with just their corresponding mobile number. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by providing mobile number of targeted user, to obtain complete access to the targeted user account."
            }
          ],
          "value": "This vulnerability exists in Shilpi Client Dashboard due to implementation of inadequate authentication mechanism in the login module wherein access to any users account is granted with just their corresponding mobile number. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability by providing mobile number of targeted user, to obtain complete access to the targeted user account."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackRequirements": "NONE",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 7.6,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "LOW",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "LOW",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308: Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2024-10-04T12:13:22.614Z",
        "orgId": "66834db9-ab24-42b4-be80-296b2e40335c",
        "shortName": "CERT-In"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "third-party-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://www.cert-in.org.in/s2cMainServlet?pageid=PUBVLNOTES01\u0026VLCODE=CIVN-2024-0313"
        }
      ],
      "solutions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "Upgrade Client Dashboard to version 9.7.0 \u003cbr\u003e"
            }
          ],
          "value": "Upgrade Client Dashboard to version 9.7.0"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Insecure Authentication Vulnerability",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "66834db9-ab24-42b4-be80-296b2e40335c",
    "assignerShortName": "CERT-In",
    "cveId": "CVE-2024-47652",
    "datePublished": "2024-10-04T12:13:22.614Z",
    "dateReserved": "2024-09-30T11:42:54.095Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2024-10-04T14:12:13.841Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

CVE-2024-27928 (GCVE-0-2024-27928)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-06-17 22:12 – Updated: 2026-06-18 12:57
VLAI
Title
Vantage6: 2FA can be circumvented with hacked email access
Summary
vantage6 is an open-source infrastructure for privacy preserving analysis. Prior to version 5.0.0, if an attacker hacks into a vantage6 user's email account, they can 1) reset the password via email and then 2) reset the 2FA token via email. This way they reduce 2FA to 1FA (email access). Note that most email providers require 2FA to access email, so this issue is not very likely to cause issues. Version 5.0.0 fixes the issue. No known workarounds are available.
Severity
5.9 (Medium)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2026-06-18 12:57 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
Assigner
GitHub_M CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard C 72/100 over 7613 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
vantage6 vantage6 Affected: < 5.0.0
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2024-27928",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-06-18T12:57:27.690129Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-06-18T12:57:34.777Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "vantage6",
          "vendor": "vantage6",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 5.0.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "vantage6 is an open-source infrastructure for privacy preserving analysis. Prior to version 5.0.0, if an attacker hacks into a vantage6 user\u0027s email account, they can 1) reset the password via email and then 2) reset the 2FA token via email. This way they reduce 2FA to 1FA (email access). Note that most email providers require 2FA to access email, so this issue is not very likely to cause issues. Version 5.0.0 fixes the issue. No known workarounds are available."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV4_0": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "baseScore": 5.9,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
            "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
            "version": "4.0",
            "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308: Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-06-17T22:12:36.791Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/vantage6/vantage6/security/advisories/GHSA-4c5c-2vc3-x5w2",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/vantage6/vantage6/security/advisories/GHSA-4c5c-2vc3-x5w2"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/vantage6/vantage6/issues/1932",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/vantage6/vantage6/issues/1932"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/vantage6/vantage6/blob/main/docs/release_notes.rst#500",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/vantage6/vantage6/blob/main/docs/release_notes.rst#500"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-4c5c-2vc3-x5w2",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Vantage6: 2FA can be circumvented with hacked email access"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2024-27928",
    "datePublished": "2026-06-17T22:12:36.791Z",
    "dateReserved": "2024-02-28T15:14:14.215Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-06-18T12:57:34.777Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2"
}

CVE-2023-50934 (GCVE-0-2023-50934)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2024-02-02 01:08 – Updated: 2024-08-02 22:23
VLAI
Title
IBM PowerSC improper authentication
Summary
IBM PowerSC 1.3, 2.0, and 2.1 uses single-factor authentication which can lead to unnecessary risk of compromise when compared with the benefits of a dual-factor authentication scheme. IBM X-Force ID: 275114.
Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: yes Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2024-07-12 22:45 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
Assigner
ibm CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard B 88/100 over 1278 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
IBM PowerSC Affected: 1.3, 2.0, 2.1
Create a notification for this product.
ibm powersc Affected: 1.3
Affected: 2.0
Affected: 2.1
    cpe:2.3:a:ibm:powersc:1.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:a:ibm:powersc:2.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:a:ibm:powersc:2.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "affected": [
          {
            "cpes": [
              "cpe:2.3:a:ibm:powersc:1.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "cpe:2.3:a:ibm:powersc:2.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "cpe:2.3:a:ibm:powersc:2.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
            ],
            "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
            "product": "powersc",
            "vendor": "ibm",
            "versions": [
              {
                "status": "affected",
                "version": "1.3"
              },
              {
                "status": "affected",
                "version": "2.0"
              },
              {
                "status": "affected",
                "version": "2.1"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2023-50934",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "yes"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2024-07-12T22:45:33.905175Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-07-12T22:46:18.058Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      },
      {
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T22:23:44.110Z",
          "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
          "shortName": "CVE"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "tags": [
              "vendor-advisory",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7113759"
          },
          {
            "tags": [
              "vdb-entry",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/275114"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CVE Program Container"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "PowerSC",
          "vendor": "IBM",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "1.3, 2.0, 2.1"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "IBM PowerSC 1.3, 2.0, and 2.1 uses single-factor authentication which can lead to unnecessary risk of compromise when compared with the benefits of a dual-factor authentication scheme.  IBM X-Force ID:  275114.\n\n"
            }
          ],
          "value": "IBM PowerSC 1.3, 2.0, and 2.1 uses single-factor authentication which can lead to unnecessary risk of compromise when compared with the benefits of a dual-factor authentication scheme.  IBM X-Force ID:  275114.\n\n"
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 5.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "LOW",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308 Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2024-02-02T01:08:46.298Z",
        "orgId": "9a959283-ebb5-44b6-b705-dcc2bbced522",
        "shortName": "ibm"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7113759"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry"
          ],
          "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/275114"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "IBM PowerSC improper authentication",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.1.0-dev"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "9a959283-ebb5-44b6-b705-dcc2bbced522",
    "assignerShortName": "ibm",
    "cveId": "CVE-2023-50934",
    "datePublished": "2024-02-02T01:08:46.298Z",
    "dateReserved": "2023-12-16T01:37:06.021Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T22:23:44.110Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

CVE-2023-49075 (GCVE-0-2023-49075)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2023-11-28 04:33 – Updated: 2024-08-02 21:46
VLAI
Title
Pimcore Admin UI has Two Factor Authentication disabled for non admin security firewalls
Summary
The Admin Classic Bundle provides a Backend UI for Pimcore. `AdminBundle\Security\PimcoreUserTwoFactorCondition` introduced in v11 disable the two factor authentication for all non-admin security firewalls. An authenticated user can access the system without having to provide the two factor credentials. This issue has been patched in version 1.2.2.
Severity
8.5 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
Assigner
GitHub_M CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard C 72/100 over 7613 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T21:46:29.190Z",
          "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
          "shortName": "CVE"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "name": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/security/advisories/GHSA-9wwg-r3c7-4vfg",
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_CONFIRM",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/security/advisories/GHSA-9wwg-r3c7-4vfg"
          },
          {
            "name": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345",
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345"
          },
          {
            "name": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/commit/e412b0597830ae564a604e2579eb40e76f7f0628",
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/commit/e412b0597830ae564a604e2579eb40e76f7f0628"
          },
          {
            "name": "https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345.patch",
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345.patch"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CVE Program Container"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "admin-ui-classic-bundle",
          "vendor": "pimcore",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003c 1.2.2"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "The Admin Classic Bundle provides a Backend UI for Pimcore. `AdminBundle\\Security\\PimcoreUserTwoFactorCondition` introduced in v11 disable the two factor authentication for all non-admin security firewalls. An authenticated user can access the system without having to provide the two factor credentials. This issue has been patched in version 1.2.2.\n\n"
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "LOW",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
            "baseScore": 8.5,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
            "scope": "CHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "REQUIRED",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308: Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2023-11-28T04:33:23.642Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/security/advisories/GHSA-9wwg-r3c7-4vfg",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/security/advisories/GHSA-9wwg-r3c7-4vfg"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/commit/e412b0597830ae564a604e2579eb40e76f7f0628",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/commit/e412b0597830ae564a604e2579eb40e76f7f0628"
        },
        {
          "name": "https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345.patch",
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/pimcore/admin-ui-classic-bundle/pull/345.patch"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-9wwg-r3c7-4vfg",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Pimcore Admin UI has Two Factor Authentication disabled for non admin security firewalls"
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2023-49075",
    "datePublished": "2023-11-28T04:33:23.642Z",
    "dateReserved": "2023-11-21T18:57:30.427Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T21:46:29.190Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

CVE-2023-25681 (GCVE-0-2023-25681)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2024-03-05 19:42 – Updated: 2024-08-02 11:25
VLAI
Title
IBM Spectrum Virtualize security bypass
Summary
LDAP users on IBM Spectrum Virtualize 8.5 which are configured to require multifactor authentication can still authenticate to the CIM interface using only username and password. This does not affect local users with MFA configured or remote users authenticating via single sign-on. IBM X-Force ID: 247033.
Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: no Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator · CISA-ADP (v2.0.3)
Decision recorded 2024-07-12 21:20 UTC
CWE
  • CWE-308 - Use of Single-factor Authentication
Assigner
ibm CNA under the mitre root
CNA scorecard B 88/100 over 1278 records in the last 180 days details
References
Impacted products
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2023-25681",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2024-07-12T21:20:31.395019Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-07-12T21:20:38.464Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      },
      {
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T11:25:19.391Z",
          "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
          "shortName": "CVE"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "tags": [
              "vendor-advisory",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6962203"
          },
          {
            "tags": [
              "vdb-entry",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/247033"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CVE Program Container"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Spectrum Virtualize",
          "vendor": "IBM",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "8.5"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "LDAP users on IBM Spectrum Virtualize 8.5 which are configured to require multifactor authentication can still authenticate to the CIM interface using only username and password. This does not affect local users with MFA configured or remote users authenticating via single sign-on.  IBM X-Force ID:  247033."
            }
          ],
          "value": "LDAP users on IBM Spectrum Virtualize 8.5 which are configured to require multifactor authentication can still authenticate to the CIM interface using only username and password. This does not affect local users with MFA configured or remote users authenticating via single sign-on.  IBM X-Force ID:  247033."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 5.3,
            "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
            "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-308",
              "description": "CWE-308 Use of Single-factor Authentication",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2024-03-05T19:42:01.977Z",
        "orgId": "9a959283-ebb5-44b6-b705-dcc2bbced522",
        "shortName": "ibm"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory"
          ],
          "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/6962203"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "vdb-entry"
          ],
          "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/247033"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "IBM Spectrum Virtualize security bypass",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "Vulnogram 0.1.0-dev"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "9a959283-ebb5-44b6-b705-dcc2bbced522",
    "assignerShortName": "ibm",
    "cveId": "CVE-2023-25681",
    "datePublished": "2024-03-05T19:42:01.977Z",
    "dateReserved": "2023-02-11T18:09:03.126Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T11:25:19.391Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

GHSA-2F8H-X67P-5Q4W

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-06 21:15 – Updated: 2024-04-04 05:48
VLAI
Details

In JetBrains TeamCity before 2023.05 authentication checks were missing – 2FA was not checked for some sensitive account actions

Severity
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-34228"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-308"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-05-31T14:15:10Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In JetBrains TeamCity before 2023.05 authentication checks were missing \u2013 2FA was not checked for some sensitive account actions",
  "id": "GHSA-2f8h-x67p-5q4w",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T05:48:03Z",
  "published": "2023-07-06T21:15:06Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-34228"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.jetbrains.com/privacy-security/issues-fixed"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-45GV-9WJV-XH7P

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-09 17:08 – Updated: 2026-10-09 17:08
VLAI
Summary
Nginx UI: Authentication bypass: password login does not enforce a passkey-only second factor (2FA bypass)
Details

Summary

nginx-ui supports two second-factor methods — TOTP (OTP) and WebAuthn passkeys — and reports an account as 2FA-enabled when either is configured. However, the password login endpoint (POST /api/login) only enforces a second factor when a TOTP secret is present. An account that has registered a passkey but no TOTP is logged in after password verification alone — the passkey is never requested. This silently downgrades a passkey-protected account to single-factor (password-only) authentication.

Details

The account's 2FA policy treats passkeys as a valid factor (model/user.go):

func (u *User) EnabledOTP() bool     { return len(u.OTPSecret) != 0 }
func (u *User) EnabledPasskey() bool { /* true if a passkey row exists */ }
func (u *User) Enabled2FA() bool     { return u.EnabledOTP() || u.EnabledPasskey() }

func (u *User) AfterFind(_ *gorm.DB) error {
    u.EnabledTwoFA = u.Enabled2FA() // exposed to the UI as `enabled_2fa`
    return nil
}

But the login handler only checks EnabledOTP() (api/user/auth.go, Login):

u, err := user.Login(json.Name, json.Password)
...
if u.EnabledOTP() {                       // <-- only TOTP is enforced
    if json.OTP == "" && json.RecoveryCode == "" {
        c.JSON(http.StatusOK, LoginResponse{Message: "The user has enabled 2FA", Code: Enabled2FA}) // 199
        user.BanIP(clientIP)
        return
    }
    if _, err = user.VerifyOTP(u, json.OTP, json.RecoveryCode); err != nil { /* ... */ }
    secureSessionID = user.SetSecureSessionID(u.ID)
}

// Passkey-only accounts fall through to here and receive a full session token:
accessToken, err := user.GenerateJWT(u)

No branch requires a WebAuthn assertion during password login when EnabledPasskey() is true. The root cause is the mismatch between the policy definition (Enabled2FA() = OTP or passkey) and the enforcement check (EnabledOTP() only).

The same EnabledOTP()-only gating in RequireSecureSession() (internal/middleware/secure_session.go) means passkey-only users are also exempted from step-up on sensitive actions.

Proof of Concept

Tested against nginx-ui built from source (go build -tags unembed) on 127.0.0.1:9000, with WebAuthn configured and a victim account that has a registered passkey and no TOTP. The vulnerable code is identical on the production main branch (api/user/auth.go Login gates on u.EnabledOTP() only; verified at commit 6c86e5a, 2026-05-17).

Account state advertised by GET /api/2fa_status:

{"enabled":true,"otp_status":false,"passkey_status":true, ...}

Attacker logs in with password only (POST /api/login, encrypted params as the client normally sends):

HTTP 200
{"message":"ok","code":200,"token":"eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9...."}

code: 200 + a valid JWT = an authenticated session, with the passkey never used. For comparison, the identical account with a TOTP secret instead correctly returns the second-factor challenge:

HTTP 200
{"message":"The user has enabled 2FA","code":199}
Account state POST /api/login (password only)
Passkey registered, no TOTP code 200 + JWT — 2FA NOT enforced
TOTP registered code 199 — 2FA challenge enforced

This isolates the defect: the login path enforces OTP but ignores passkeys.

Impact

  • Any account protected only by a passkey is reduced to password-only authentication. An attacker who obtains the password (phishing, reuse, leak) gains full access despite the registered security key.
  • In nginx-ui all authenticated users are effectively administrators and the terminal feature grants a host shell, so account takeover leads to full control of the managed nginx instance / host.
  • Users are given a false sense of security: the UI shows the account as 2FA-enabled while the second factor is not enforced at login.

Remediation

  • Gate the second-factor decision on u.Enabled2FA() (not u.EnabledOTP()) in Login, in both SSO callbacks, and in RequireSecureSession().
  • For a passkey-only user logging in with a password, return a "passkey assertion required" challenge and complete login only after a successful WebAuthn assertion (the begin_passkey_login / finish_passkey_login flow already exists and should be required as the second step).
  • Centralize session-token issuance so no login entry point can skip the 2FA decision.

Affected components

  • api/user/auth.go — Login
  • model/user.go — EnabledOTP, EnabledPasskey, Enabled2FA, AfterFind
  • api/user/2fa.go — get2FAStatus
  • internal/middleware/secure_session.go — RequireSecureSession
Severity
8.1 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.9.10-0.20250517140552-daee3ac7ade1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.9.10-0.20260728074558-95cd21b70814"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-107808"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-287",
      "CWE-305",
      "CWE-308"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-10-09T17:08:15Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nnginx-ui supports two second-factor methods \u2014 TOTP (OTP) and WebAuthn passkeys \u2014\nand reports an account as 2FA-enabled when **either** is configured. However, the\npassword login endpoint (`POST /api/login`) only enforces a second factor when a\n**TOTP secret** is present. An account that has registered a **passkey but no\nTOTP** is logged in after password verification alone \u2014 the passkey is never\nrequested. This silently downgrades a passkey-protected account to single-factor\n(password-only) authentication.\n\n## Details\n\nThe account\u0027s 2FA policy treats passkeys as a valid factor (`model/user.go`):\n\n```go\nfunc (u *User) EnabledOTP() bool     { return len(u.OTPSecret) != 0 }\nfunc (u *User) EnabledPasskey() bool { /* true if a passkey row exists */ }\nfunc (u *User) Enabled2FA() bool     { return u.EnabledOTP() || u.EnabledPasskey() }\n\nfunc (u *User) AfterFind(_ *gorm.DB) error {\n    u.EnabledTwoFA = u.Enabled2FA() // exposed to the UI as `enabled_2fa`\n    return nil\n}\n```\n\nBut the login handler only checks `EnabledOTP()` (`api/user/auth.go`, `Login`):\n\n```go\nu, err := user.Login(json.Name, json.Password)\n...\nif u.EnabledOTP() {                       // \u003c-- only TOTP is enforced\n    if json.OTP == \"\" \u0026\u0026 json.RecoveryCode == \"\" {\n        c.JSON(http.StatusOK, LoginResponse{Message: \"The user has enabled 2FA\", Code: Enabled2FA}) // 199\n        user.BanIP(clientIP)\n        return\n    }\n    if _, err = user.VerifyOTP(u, json.OTP, json.RecoveryCode); err != nil { /* ... */ }\n    secureSessionID = user.SetSecureSessionID(u.ID)\n}\n\n// Passkey-only accounts fall through to here and receive a full session token:\naccessToken, err := user.GenerateJWT(u)\n```\n\nNo branch requires a WebAuthn assertion during password login when\n`EnabledPasskey()` is true. The root cause is the mismatch between the\n**policy definition** (`Enabled2FA()` = OTP **or** passkey) and the\n**enforcement check** (`EnabledOTP()` only).\n\nThe same `EnabledOTP()`-only gating in `RequireSecureSession()`\n(`internal/middleware/secure_session.go`) means passkey-only users are also\nexempted from step-up on sensitive actions.\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\nTested against nginx-ui built from source (`go build -tags unembed`) on\n`127.0.0.1:9000`, with WebAuthn configured and a victim account that has a\nregistered passkey and **no** TOTP. The vulnerable code is identical on the\nproduction `main` branch (`api/user/auth.go` `Login` gates on `u.EnabledOTP()`\nonly; verified at commit `6c86e5a`, 2026-05-17).\n\nAccount state advertised by `GET /api/2fa_status`:\n\n```json\n{\"enabled\":true,\"otp_status\":false,\"passkey_status\":true, ...}\n```\n\nAttacker logs in with **password only** (`POST /api/login`, encrypted params as\nthe client normally sends):\n\n```\nHTTP 200\n{\"message\":\"ok\",\"code\":200,\"token\":\"eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9....\"}\n```\n\n`code: 200` + a valid JWT = an authenticated session, with the passkey never\nused. For comparison, the identical account with a TOTP secret instead correctly\nreturns the second-factor challenge:\n\n```\nHTTP 200\n{\"message\":\"The user has enabled 2FA\",\"code\":199}\n```\n\n| Account state | `POST /api/login` (password only) |\n|---|---|\n| Passkey registered, no TOTP | `code 200` + JWT \u2014 **2FA NOT enforced** |\n| TOTP registered | `code 199` \u2014 2FA challenge enforced |\n\nThis isolates the defect: the login path enforces OTP but ignores passkeys.\n\n## Impact\n\n- Any account protected **only** by a passkey is reduced to password-only\n  authentication. An attacker who obtains the password (phishing, reuse, leak)\n  gains full access despite the registered security key.\n- In nginx-ui all authenticated users are effectively administrators and the\n  terminal feature grants a host shell, so account takeover leads to full\n  control of the managed nginx instance / host.\n- Users are given a false sense of security: the UI shows the account as\n  2FA-enabled while the second factor is not enforced at login.\n\n## Remediation\n\n- Gate the second-factor decision on `u.Enabled2FA()` (not `u.EnabledOTP()`) in\n  `Login`, in both SSO callbacks, and in `RequireSecureSession()`.\n- For a passkey-only user logging in with a password, return a\n  \"passkey assertion required\" challenge and complete login only after a\n  successful WebAuthn assertion (the `begin_passkey_login` / `finish_passkey_login`\n  flow already exists and should be required as the second step).\n- Centralize session-token issuance so no login entry point can skip the 2FA\n  decision.\n\n## Affected components\n\n- `api/user/auth.go` \u2014 `Login`\n- `model/user.go` \u2014 `EnabledOTP`, `EnabledPasskey`, `Enabled2FA`, `AfterFind`\n- `api/user/2fa.go` \u2014 `get2FAStatus`\n- `internal/middleware/secure_session.go` \u2014 `RequireSecureSession`",
  "id": "GHSA-45gv-9wjv-xh7p",
  "modified": "2026-10-09T17:08:15Z",
  "published": "2026-10-09T17:08:15Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/security/advisories/GHSA-45gv-9wjv-xh7p"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/commit/95cd21b70814e5d9a48a359aa238aeea1ac97429"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/releases/tag/v2.5.0"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Nginx UI: Authentication bypass: password login does not enforce a passkey-only second factor (2FA bypass)"
}

GHSA-475P-8R27-F6VH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-09-04 18:30 – Updated: 2024-09-04 18:30
VLAI
Details

IBM webMethods Integration 10.15 could allow an authenticated user to create scheduler tasks that would allow them to escalate their privileges to administrator due to missing authentication.

Severity
8.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-45075"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-306",
      "CWE-308"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-09-04T16:15:08Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "IBM webMethods Integration 10.15 could allow an authenticated user to create scheduler tasks that would allow them to escalate their privileges to administrator due to missing authentication.",
  "id": "GHSA-475p-8r27-f6vh",
  "modified": "2024-09-04T18:30:58Z",
  "published": "2024-09-04T18:30:57Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-45075"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7167245"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}
Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Use multiple independent authentication schemes, which ensures that -- if one of the methods is compromised -- the system itself is still likely safe from compromise. For this reason, if multiple schemes are possible, they should be implemented and required -- especially if they are easy to use.

CAPEC-16: Dictionary-based Password Attack

An attacker tries each of the words in a dictionary as passwords to gain access to the system via some user's account. If the password chosen by the user was a word within the dictionary, this attack will be successful (in the absence of other mitigations). This is a specific instance of the password brute forcing attack pattern.

Dictionary Attacks differ from similar attacks such as Password Spraying (CAPEC-565) and Credential Stuffing (CAPEC-600), since they leverage unknown username/password combinations and don't care about inducing account lockouts.

CAPEC-49: Password Brute Forcing

An adversary tries every possible value for a password until they succeed. A brute force attack, if feasible computationally, will always be successful because it will essentially go through all possible passwords given the alphabet used (lower case letters, upper case letters, numbers, symbols, etc.) and the maximum length of the password.

CAPEC-509: Kerberoasting

Through the exploitation of how service accounts leverage Kerberos authentication with Service Principal Names (SPNs), the adversary obtains and subsequently cracks the hashed credentials of a service account target to exploit its privileges. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. As an authenticated user, the adversary may request Active Directory and obtain a service ticket with portions encrypted via RC4 with the private key of the authenticated account. By extracting the local ticket and saving it disk, the adversary can brute force the hashed value to reveal the target account credentials.

CAPEC-55: Rainbow Table Password Cracking

An attacker gets access to the database table where hashes of passwords are stored. They then use a rainbow table of pre-computed hash chains to attempt to look up the original password. Once the original password corresponding to the hash is obtained, the attacker uses the original password to gain access to the system.

CAPEC-555: Remote Services with Stolen Credentials

This pattern of attack involves an adversary that uses stolen credentials to leverage remote services such as RDP, telnet, SSH, and VNC to log into a system. Once access is gained, any number of malicious activities could be performed.

CAPEC-560: Use of Known Domain Credentials

An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate credentials (e.g. userID/password) to achieve authentication and to perform authorized actions under the guise of an authenticated user or service.

CAPEC-561: Windows Admin Shares with Stolen Credentials

An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows administrator credentials (e.g. userID/password) to access Windows Admin Shares on a local machine or within a Windows domain.

CAPEC-565: Password Spraying

In a Password Spraying attack, an adversary tries a small list (e.g. 3-5) of common or expected passwords, often matching the target's complexity policy, against a known list of user accounts to gain valid credentials. The adversary tries a particular password for each user account, before moving onto the next password in the list. This approach assists the adversary in remaining undetected by avoiding rapid or frequent account lockouts. The adversary may then reattempt the process with additional passwords, once enough time has passed to prevent inducing a lockout.

CAPEC-600: Credential Stuffing

An adversary tries known username/password combinations against different systems, applications, or services to gain additional authenticated access. Credential Stuffing attacks rely upon the fact that many users leverage the same username/password combination for multiple systems, applications, and services.

CAPEC-644: Use of Captured Hashes (Pass The Hash)

An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows domain credential hash values to access systems within the domain that leverage the Lan Man (LM) and/or NT Lan Man (NTLM) authentication protocols.

CAPEC-645: Use of Captured Tickets (Pass The Ticket)

An adversary uses stolen Kerberos tickets to access systems/resources that leverage the Kerberos authentication protocol. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. An adversary can obtain any one of these tickets (e.g. Service Ticket, Ticket Granting Ticket, Silver Ticket, or Golden Ticket) to authenticate to a system/resource without needing the account's credentials. Depending on the ticket obtained, the adversary may be able to access a particular resource or generate TGTs for any account within an Active Directory Domain.

CAPEC-652: Use of Known Kerberos Credentials

An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Kerberos credentials (e.g. Kerberos service account userID/password or Kerberos Tickets) with the goal of achieving authenticated access to additional systems, applications, or services within the domain.

CAPEC-653: Use of Known Operating System Credentials

An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate operating system credentials (e.g. userID/password) to achieve authentication and to perform authorized actions on the system, under the guise of an authenticated user or service. This applies to any Operating System.

CAPEC-70: Try Common or Default Usernames and Passwords

An adversary may try certain common or default usernames and passwords to gain access into the system and perform unauthorized actions. An adversary may try an intelligent brute force using empty passwords, known vendor default credentials, as well as a dictionary of common usernames and passwords. Many vendor products come preconfigured with default (and thus well-known) usernames and passwords that should be deleted prior to usage in a production environment. It is a common mistake to forget to remove these default login credentials. Another problem is that users would pick very simple (common) passwords (e.g. "secret" or "password") that make it easier for the attacker to gain access to the system compared to using a brute force attack or even a dictionary attack using a full dictionary.

← Back to the CWE list