GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-G597-PQH2-2FW7

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-10 15:33 – Updated: 2026-09-10 15:33
VLAI
Details

Capgo (capgo.app) fails to restrict direct write access to the public.sso_providers table exposed through Supabase PostgREST. A holder of an ordinary Capgo full API key can insert a row with status='active' and enforce_sso=true, bypassing the intended backend SSO provisioning route (supabase/functions/_backend/private/sso/providers.ts) and its controls: the Enterprise plan requirement, SSO provider creation via the Supabase Management API, DNS TXT domain-ownership verification, the pending_verification → verified → active status transition, and issuance of a trusted provider ID by Supabase Auth. The forged row is trusted by SSO discovery and enforcement logic, including the unauthenticated login preflight endpoint /private/sso/check-domain, which then reports {"has_sso": true, "enforce_sso": true} for domains that were never verified, allowing attacker-controlled SSO enforcement to be asserted for arbitrary domains and disrupting normal login. All versions are affected; at the time of the advisory no patch was available.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-88864"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-284"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-09-10T14:17:12Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "Capgo (capgo.app) fails to restrict direct write access to the public.sso_providers table exposed through Supabase PostgREST. A holder of an ordinary Capgo full API key can insert a row with status=\u0027active\u0027 and enforce_sso=true, bypassing the intended backend SSO provisioning route (supabase/functions/_backend/private/sso/providers.ts) and its controls: the Enterprise plan requirement, SSO provider creation via the Supabase Management API, DNS TXT domain-ownership verification, the pending_verification \u2192 verified \u2192 active status transition, and issuance of a trusted provider ID by Supabase Auth. The forged row is trusted by SSO discovery and enforcement logic, including the unauthenticated login preflight endpoint /private/sso/check-domain, which then reports {\"has_sso\": true, \"enforce_sso\": true} for domains that were never verified, allowing attacker-controlled SSO enforcement to be asserted for arbitrary domains and disrupting normal login. All versions are affected; at the time of the advisory no patch was available.",
  "id": "GHSA-g597-pqh2-2fw7",
  "modified": "2026-09-10T15:33:17Z",
  "published": "2026-09-10T15:33:17Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/Cap-go/capgo.app/security/advisories/GHSA-xg7v-83qv-qfff"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-88864"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/capgo-sso-provider-authentication-bypass-via-postgrest-direct-write"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

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.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…