ghsa-92rq-c8cf-prrq
Vulnerability from github
Published
2025-03-12 20:16
Modified
2025-03-14 12:32
Severity ?
7.7 (High) - CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P
Summary
Ruby SAML allows remote Denial of Service (DoS) with compressed SAML responses
Details

Summary

ruby-saml is susceptible to remote Denial of Service (DoS) with compressed SAML responses.

Ruby-saml uses zlib to decompress SAML responses in case they're compressed. It is possible to bypass the message size check with a compressed assertion since the message size is checked before inflation and not after.

Impact

This issue may lead to remote Denial of Service (DoS).

Show details on source website

To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "RubyGems",
        "name": "ruby-saml"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.12.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "RubyGems",
        "name": "ruby-saml"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.13.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.18.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-25293"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-400",
      "CWE-770"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-03-12T20:16:50Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-03-12T21:15:42Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nruby-saml is susceptible to remote Denial of Service (DoS) with compressed SAML responses.\n\nRuby-saml uses zlib to decompress SAML responses in case they\u0027re compressed. It is possible to bypass the message size check with a compressed assertion since the message size is checked before inflation and not after.\n\n### Impact\nThis issue may lead to remote Denial of Service (DoS).",
  "id": "GHSA-92rq-c8cf-prrq",
  "modified": "2025-03-14T12:32:01Z",
  "published": "2025-03-12T20:16:50Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/security/advisories/GHSA-92rq-c8cf-prrq"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/omniauth/omniauth-saml/security/advisories/GHSA-hw46-3hmr-x9xv"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-25293"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/commit/acac9e9cc0b9a507882c614f25d41f8b47be349a"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/commit/e2da4c6dae7dc01a4d9cd221395140a67e2b3eb1"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://about.gitlab.com/releases/2025/03/12/patch-release-gitlab-17-9-2-released"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.blog/security/sign-in-as-anyone-bypassing-saml-sso-authentication-with-parser-differentials"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/releases/tag/v1.12.4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/SAML-Toolkits/ruby-saml/releases/tag/v1.18.0"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/rubysec/ruby-advisory-db/blob/master/gems/ruby-saml/CVE-2025-25293.yml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://security.netapp.com/advisory/ntap-20250314-0008"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Ruby SAML allows remote Denial of Service (DoS) with compressed SAML responses"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.