Action not permitted
Modal body text goes here.
Modal Title
Modal Body
GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-16 22:38 – Updated: 2026-06-05 14:29Summary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "authlib"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.6.11"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-41425"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-352"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-04-16T22:38:03Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-24T20:16:27Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"modified": "2026-06-05T14:29:21Z",
"published": "2026-04-16T22:38:03Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache"
}
BDU:2026-14977 (CVE-2026-41425)
Vulnerability from fstec – Published: 2026-09-21 – Updated: 2026-09-21 – View on bdu.fstec.ru Exploit publicly available Fixed- CWE-352 - Межсайтовая фальсификация запросов
{
"CVSS 2.0": "AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N",
"CVSS 3.0": "AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"CVSS 4.0": null,
"remediation_\u0418\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0442\u043e\u0440": null,
"remediation_\u041d\u0430\u0438\u043c\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435": null,
"\u0412\u0435\u043d\u0434\u043e\u0440 \u041f\u041e": "Red Hat, Inc., \u0421\u043e\u043e\u0431\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e \u0441\u0432\u043e\u0431\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043e\u0431\u0435\u0441\u043f\u0435\u0447\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f, \u041e\u041e\u041e \u00ab\u0420\u0435\u0434 \u0421\u043e\u0444\u0442\u00bb, Canonical Ltd.",
"\u0412\u0435\u0440\u0441\u0438\u044f \u041f\u041e": "3 (Red Hat Quay), 12 (Debian GNU/Linux), 7.3 (\u0420\u0415\u0414 \u041e\u0421), 6 (Red Hat Satellite), 2 (Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform), 24.04 LTS (Ubuntu), 13 (Debian GNU/Linux), 8.0 (\u0420\u0415\u0414 \u041e\u0421), 26.04 LTS (Ubuntu), 8 (Migration Toolkit for Applications), \u0434\u043e 1.6.11 (Authlib)",
"\u0412\u043e\u0437\u043c\u043e\u0436\u043d\u044b\u0435 \u043c\u0435\u0440\u044b \u043f\u043e \u0443\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044e": "\u0412 \u0443\u0441\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0438\u044f\u0445 \u043e\u0442\u0441\u0443\u0442\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0438\u044f \u043e\u0431\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0431\u0435\u0437\u043e\u043f\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 \u043e\u0442 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0438\u0437\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044f \u0440\u0435\u043a\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0434\u0443\u0435\u0442\u0441\u044f \u043f\u0440\u0438\u0434\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0438\u0432\u0430\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f \"\u0420\u0435\u043a\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0434\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0439 \u043f\u043e \u0431\u0435\u0437\u043e\u043f\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u043d\u0430\u0441\u0442\u0440\u043e\u0439\u043a\u0435 \u043e\u043f\u0435\u0440\u0430\u0446\u0438\u043e\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u0441\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0435\u043c LINUX\", \u0438\u0437\u043b\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u0432 \u043c\u0435\u0442\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0447\u0435\u0441\u043a\u043e\u043c \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0435 \u0424\u0421\u0422\u042d\u041a \u0420\u043e\u0441\u0441\u0438\u0438, \u0443\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0434\u0451\u043d\u043d\u043e\u043c 25 \u0434\u0435\u043a\u0430\u0431\u0440\u044f 2022 \u0433\u043e\u0434\u0430.\n\n\u0418\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u044c\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0440\u0435\u043a\u043e\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0434\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0439:\n\u0414\u043b\u044f Authlib:\nhttps://github.com/authlib/authlib\nhttps://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv\nhttps://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml\n\n\u0414\u043b\u044f \u0420\u0435\u0434 \u041e\u0421: \nhttp://repo.red-soft.ru/redos/7.3c/x86_64/updates/\nhttp://repo.red-soft.ru/redos/8.0/x86_64/updates/\n\n\u0414\u043b\u044f Debian GNU/Linux:\nhttps://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-41425\nhttps://deb.freexian.com/extended-lts/tracker/CVE-2026-41425\n\n\u0414\u043b\u044f \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0434\u0443\u043a\u0442\u043e\u0432 Red Hat Inc.:\nhttps://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-41425\n\n\u0414\u043b\u044f Ubuntu:\nhttps://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2026-41425",
"\u0414\u0430\u0442\u0430 \u0432\u044b\u044f\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f": "16.04.2026",
"\u0414\u0430\u0442\u0430 \u043f\u043e\u0441\u043b\u0435\u0434\u043d\u0435\u0433\u043e \u043e\u0431\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f": "21.09.2026",
"\u0414\u0430\u0442\u0430 \u043f\u0443\u0431\u043b\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438": "21.09.2026",
"\u0418\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0442\u043e\u0440": "BDU:2026-14977",
"\u0418\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0442\u043e\u0440\u044b \u0434\u0440\u0443\u0433\u0438\u0445 \u0441\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0435\u043c \u043e\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "CVE-2026-41425, GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"\u0418\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f \u043e\u0431 \u0443\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0438": "\u0423\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0443\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0430",
"\u041a\u043b\u0430\u0441\u0441 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "\u0423\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u044c \u0430\u0440\u0445\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043a\u0442\u0443\u0440\u044b",
"\u041d\u0430\u0437\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u041f\u041e": "Red Hat Quay, Debian GNU/Linux, \u0420\u0415\u0414 \u041e\u0421 (\u0437\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u044c \u0432 \u0435\u0434\u0438\u043d\u043e\u043c \u0440\u0435\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0435 \u0440\u043e\u0441\u0441\u0438\u0439\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c \u21163751), Red Hat Satellite, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Ubuntu, Migration Toolkit for Applications, Authlib",
"\u041d\u0430\u0438\u043c\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u041e\u0421 \u0438 \u0442\u0438\u043f \u0430\u043f\u043f\u0430\u0440\u0430\u0442\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u043f\u043b\u0430\u0442\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u044b": "\u0421\u043e\u043e\u0431\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e \u0441\u0432\u043e\u0431\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043e\u0431\u0435\u0441\u043f\u0435\u0447\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f Debian GNU/Linux 12 , \u041e\u041e\u041e \u00ab\u0420\u0435\u0434 \u0421\u043e\u0444\u0442\u00bb \u0420\u0415\u0414 \u041e\u0421 7.3 (\u0437\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u044c \u0432 \u0435\u0434\u0438\u043d\u043e\u043c \u0440\u0435\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0435 \u0440\u043e\u0441\u0441\u0438\u0439\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c \u21163751), Canonical Ltd. Ubuntu 24.04 LTS , \u0421\u043e\u043e\u0431\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e \u0441\u0432\u043e\u0431\u043e\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043e\u0431\u0435\u0441\u043f\u0435\u0447\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f Debian GNU/Linux 13 , \u041e\u041e\u041e \u00ab\u0420\u0435\u0434 \u0421\u043e\u0444\u0442\u00bb \u0420\u0415\u0414 \u041e\u0421 8.0 (\u0437\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u044c \u0432 \u0435\u0434\u0438\u043d\u043e\u043c \u0440\u0435\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0435 \u0440\u043e\u0441\u0441\u0438\u0439\u0441\u043a\u0438\u0445 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c \u21163751), Canonical Ltd. Ubuntu 26.04 LTS ",
"\u041d\u0430\u0438\u043c\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "\u0423\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u043e\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430 OAuth-\u0430\u0443\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0432\u0435\u0431-\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043b\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u043d\u0430 \u0431\u0430\u0437\u0435 Starlette \u0431\u0438\u0431\u043b\u0438\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043a\u0438 Authlib \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0441\u0435\u0440\u0432\u0435\u0440\u043e\u0432 OAuth \u0438 OpenID Connect, \u043f\u043e\u0437\u0432\u043e\u043b\u044f\u044e\u0449\u0430\u044f \u043d\u0430\u0440\u0443\u0448\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044e \u043e\u0441\u0443\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0438\u0442\u044c CSRF-\u0430\u0442\u0430\u043a\u0443",
"\u041d\u0430\u043b\u0438\u0447\u0438\u0435 \u044d\u043a\u0441\u043f\u043b\u043e\u0439\u0442\u0430": "\u0421\u0443\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0443\u0435\u0442 \u0432 \u043e\u0442\u043a\u0440\u044b\u0442\u043e\u043c \u0434\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f\u0435",
"\u041e\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u043e\u0448\u0438\u0431\u043a\u0438 CWE": "\u041c\u0435\u0436\u0441\u0430\u0439\u0442\u043e\u0432\u0430\u044f \u0444\u0430\u043b\u044c\u0441\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f \u0437\u0430\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441\u043e\u0432 (CWE-352)",
"\u041e\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0430\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "\u0423\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u044c \u043a\u043e\u043c\u043f\u043e\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430 OAuth-\u0430\u0443\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0438\u0444\u0438\u043a\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438 \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0432\u0435\u0431-\u043f\u0440\u0438\u043b\u043e\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u043d\u0430 \u0431\u0430\u0437\u0435 Starlette \u0431\u0438\u0431\u043b\u0438\u043e\u0442\u0435\u043a\u0438 Authlib \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0441\u0435\u0440\u0432\u0435\u0440\u043e\u0432 OAuth \u0438 OpenID Connect \u0441\u0432\u044f\u0437\u0430\u043d\u0430 \u0441 \u043f\u043e\u0434\u0434\u0435\u043b\u043a\u043e\u0439 \u043c\u0435\u0436\u0441\u0430\u0439\u0442\u043e\u0432\u044b\u0445 \u0437\u0430\u043f\u0440\u043e\u0441\u043e\u0432. \u042d\u043a\u0441\u043f\u043b\u0443\u0430\u0442\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 \u043c\u043e\u0436\u0435\u0442 \u043f\u043e\u0437\u0432\u043e\u043b\u0438\u0442\u044c \u043d\u0430\u0440\u0443\u0448\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044e, \u0434\u0435\u0439\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0443\u044e\u0449\u0435\u043c\u0443 \u0443\u0434\u0430\u043b\u0435\u043d\u043d\u043e, \u043e\u0441\u0443\u0449\u0435\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0438\u0442\u044c CSRF-\u0430\u0442\u0430\u043a\u0443",
"\u041f\u043e\u0441\u043b\u0435\u0434\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0438\u044f \u044d\u043a\u0441\u043f\u043b\u0443\u0430\u0442\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": null,
"\u041f\u0440\u043e\u0447\u0430\u044f \u0438\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u044f": null,
"\u0421\u0432\u044f\u0437\u044c \u0441 \u0438\u043d\u0446\u0438\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430\u043c\u0438 \u0418\u0411": "\u0414\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0435 \u0443\u0442\u043e\u0447\u043d\u044f\u044e\u0442\u0441\u044f",
"\u0421\u043e\u0441\u0442\u043e\u044f\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "\u041e\u043f\u0443\u0431\u043b\u0438\u043a\u043e\u0432\u0430\u043d\u0430",
"\u0421\u043f\u043e\u0441\u043e\u0431 \u0443\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u043d\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f": "\u041e\u0431\u043d\u043e\u0432\u043b\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043e\u0431\u0435\u0441\u043f\u0435\u0447\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f",
"\u0421\u043f\u043e\u0441\u043e\u0431 \u044d\u043a\u0441\u043f\u043b\u0443\u0430\u0442\u0430\u0446\u0438\u0438": "\u041f\u043e\u0434\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0430 \u043f\u0440\u0438 \u0432\u0437\u0430\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0434\u0435\u0439\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0438\u0438",
"\u0421\u0441\u044b\u043b\u043a\u0438 \u043d\u0430 \u0438\u0441\u0442\u043e\u0447\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0438": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib\nhttps://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv\nhttps://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml\nhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425\nhttps://redos.red-soft.ru/support/secure/\nhttps://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-41425\nhttps://deb.freexian.com/extended-lts/tracker/CVE-2026-41425\nhttps://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-41425\nhttps://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2026-41425",
"\u0421\u0442\u0430\u0442\u0443\u0441 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "\u041f\u043e\u0434\u0442\u0432\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0434\u0435\u043d\u0430 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0438\u0437\u0432\u043e\u0434\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u0435\u043c",
"\u0422\u0438\u043f \u041f\u041e": "\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043a\u043b\u0430\u0434\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u041f\u041e \u0438\u043d\u0444\u043e\u0440\u043c\u0430\u0446\u0438\u043e\u043d\u043d\u044b\u0445 \u0441\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0435\u043c, \u041e\u043f\u0435\u0440\u0430\u0446\u0438\u043e\u043d\u043d\u0430\u044f \u0441\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0435\u043c\u0430, \u0421\u0435\u0442\u0435\u0432\u043e\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0433\u0440\u0430\u043c\u043c\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0441\u0440\u0435\u0434\u0441\u0442\u0432\u043e",
"\u0422\u0438\u043f \u043e\u0448\u0438\u0431\u043a\u0438 CWE": "CWE-352",
"\u0423\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u043d\u044c \u043e\u043f\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 \u0443\u044f\u0437\u0432\u0438\u043c\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438": "\u0421\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0443\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u043d\u044c \u043e\u043f\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 (\u0431\u0430\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u044f \u043e\u0446\u0435\u043d\u043a\u0430 CVSS 2.0 \u0441\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0432\u043b\u044f\u0435\u0442 5,8)\n\u0421\u0440\u0435\u0434\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0443\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0435\u043d\u044c \u043e\u043f\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0438 (\u0431\u0430\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0430\u044f \u043e\u0446\u0435\u043d\u043a\u0430 CVSS 3.1 \u0441\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u0432\u043b\u044f\u0435\u0442 5,4)"
}
BREW-FASTMCP-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 16:46 – Updated: 2026-09-17 19:27 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "fastmcp",
"purl": "pkg:brew/fastmcp"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.12.3"
},
{
"fixed": "3.2.4_1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.8.0"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-fastmcp-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-17T19:27:54Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T16:46:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-KASKADE-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:01 – Updated: 2026-09-17 19:28 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "kaskade",
"purl": "pkg:brew/kaskade"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.0.4"
},
{
"fixed": "4.0.7_3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.7.2"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-kaskade-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-17T19:28:28Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:01:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-KHAOS-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:01 – Updated: 2026-09-21 20:40 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "khaos",
"purl": "pkg:brew/khaos"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.4.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.7.1_5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.7.2"
},
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.7.2"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-khaos-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-21T20:40:04Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:01:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-KIMI-CLI-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:01 – Updated: 2026-09-17 20:03 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "kimi-cli",
"purl": "pkg:brew/kimi-cli"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.40"
},
{
"fixed": "1.33.0_1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.7.2"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-kimi-cli-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-17T20:03:16Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:01:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-MCP-ATLASSIAN-CVE-2… (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:13 – Updated: 2026-09-30 20:03 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "mcp-atlassian",
"purl": "pkg:brew/mcp-atlassian"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.11.11"
},
{
"fixed": "0.21.1_2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.8.0"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-mcp-atlassian-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-30T20:03:25Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:13:13Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-MCPM-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:13 – Updated: 2026-09-20 12:14 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "mcpm",
"purl": "pkg:brew/mcpm"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.1.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.14.0_3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.8.0"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-mcpm-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-20T12:14:15Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:13:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-OMNARA-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:19 – Updated: 2026-09-10 00:40 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": null,
"range_state": "affected",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.6.6",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "omnara",
"purl": "pkg:brew/omnara"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.6.6",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.6.6"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-omnara-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-10T00:40:38Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:19:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-OTERM-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:24 – Updated: 2026-09-17 18:44 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "oterm",
"purl": "pkg:brew/oterm"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.14.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.14.7_9"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.8.0",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.8.0"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-oterm-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-17T18:44:04Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:24:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
BREW-SAFETY-CVE-2026-41425 (GHSA-JJ8C-MMJ3-MMGV)
Vulnerability from osv_homebrew – Published: 2026-08-13 17:33 – Updated: 2026-09-17 17:35 – Source websiteSummary
There is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.
Details
In authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When not using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it's not just starlette.
The state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.
This issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
PoC
- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache
- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.
- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim
- The victim now completes the authorisation
Impact
This impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.
All users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker's account tied to their own.
{
"affected": [
{
"ecosystem_specific": {
"fix": "bump",
"range_state": "fixed",
"resource": "authlib",
"resource_purl": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"upstream_fixed_in": "1.6.11"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Homebrew",
"name": "safety",
"purl": "pkg:brew/safety"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.2.4"
},
{
"fixed": "3.7.0_10"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"confidence": "high",
"source": "matched",
"strategy": "registry",
"upstream_evidence": [
{
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"key": "pkg:pypi/authlib@1.7.2",
"name": "authlib",
"resource": "authlib",
"strategy": "registry",
"subject_version": "1.7.2"
}
]
},
"details": "### Summary\n\nThere is no CSRF protection on the cache feature on most integrations clients.\n\n### Details\nIn `authlib.integrations.starlette_client.OAuth`, no CSRF protection is set up when using the cache parameter. When _not_ using the cache parameter, the use of SessionMiddleware ties the client to the auth state, preventing CSRF attacks. With the cache, there is no such mechanism. Other integratons have the same issue, it\u0027s not just starlette.\n\nThe state parameter is taken from the callback URL and the state is fetched from the cache without checking that it is the same client calling the redirect endpoint as was the one that initiated the auth flow.\n\nThis issue is documented in RFC 6749 section 10.12:\nhttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12\n\n### PoC\n- Set up a Starlette integration with a cache\n- The attacker starts the auth flow up until before the callback URL is followed.\n- The attacked sends the redirect URL to the victim\n- The victim now completes the authorisation\n\n### Impact\nThis impacts all users that use the cache to store auth state.\n\nAll users will be vulnerable to CSRF attacks and may have an attacker\u0027s account tied to their own.",
"id": "BREW-safety-CVE-2026-41425",
"modified": "2026-09-17T17:35:56Z",
"published": "2026-08-13T17:33:32Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib/security/advisories/GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-41425"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/authlib/authlib"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/authlib/PYSEC-2026-25.yaml"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.7.3",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Authlib: Cross-site request forging when using cache",
"upstream": [
"GHSA-jj8c-mmj3-mmgv",
"CVE-2026-41425",
"PYSEC-2026-25"
]
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.