GHSA-RPJ7-HR7H-W6P9

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-19 20:46 – Updated: 2026-06-19 20:46
VLAI
Summary
CoreWCF: SamlSerializer skips SignatureValue verification when SAML signing token is not an X.509 certificate
Details

Impact

When a service is configured to validate SAML tokens using a method other than X.509 certificate signing, the final signature verification is skipped.

Preconditions

The service is configured to authenticate using SAML tokens and an out of band token resolver (commonly the IssuerTokenResolver of IssuedTokenServiceCredential) holds a non-X.509 SecurityToken whose key identifier the attacker can reference in the assertion’s <KeyInfo> - for example a BinarySecretSecurityToken representing the symmetric proof key issued by a WS-Trust symmetric-key holder-of-key STS.

Patches

Fixed in CoreWCF v1.8.1 and v1.9.1

Workarounds

None

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

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "NuGet",
        "name": "CoreWCF.Primitives"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.8.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "NuGet",
        "name": "CoreWCF.Primitives"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.9.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.9.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-54774"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-345",
      "CWE-347"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-19T20:46:46Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\nWhen a service is configured to validate SAML tokens using a method other than X.509 certificate signing, the final signature verification is skipped.\n\n#### Preconditions\nThe service is configured to authenticate using SAML tokens and an out of band token resolver (commonly the IssuerTokenResolver of IssuedTokenServiceCredential) holds a non-X.509 SecurityToken whose key identifier the attacker can reference in the assertion\u2019s `\u003cKeyInfo\u003e` - for example a `BinarySecretSecurityToken` representing the symmetric proof key issued by a WS-Trust symmetric-key holder-of-key STS.\n\n### Patches\nFixed in CoreWCF v1.8.1 and v1.9.1\n\n### Workarounds\nNone",
  "id": "GHSA-rpj7-hr7h-w6p9",
  "modified": "2026-06-19T20:46:46Z",
  "published": "2026-06-19T20:46:46Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/CoreWCF/CoreWCF/security/advisories/GHSA-rpj7-hr7h-w6p9"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/CoreWCF/CoreWCF"
    }
  ],
  "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:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "CoreWCF: SamlSerializer skips SignatureValue verification when SAML signing token is not an X.509 certificate"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





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.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.