ORY Fosite is a security first OAuth2 & OpenID Connect framework for Go. In Fosite before version 0.34.1, the OAuth 2.0 Clients registered redirect URLs and the redirect URL provided at the OAuth2 Authorization Endpoint where compared using strings.ToLower while they should have been compared with a simple string match. This allows an attacker to register a client with allowed redirect URL https://example.com/callback. Then perform an OAuth2 flow and requesting redirect URL https://example.com/CALLBACK. Instead of an error (invalid redirect URL), the browser is redirected to https://example.com/CALLBACK with a potentially successful OAuth2 response, depending on the state of the overall OAuth2 flow (the user might still deny the request for example). This vulnerability has been patched in ORY Fosite v0.34.1.
Weakness
The product does not properly account for differences in case sensitivity when accessing or determining the properties of a resource, leading to inconsistent results.
Affected Software
| Name |
Vendor |
Start Version |
End Version |
| Fosite |
Ory |
* |
0.34.1 (excluding) |
Extended Description
Improperly handled case sensitive data can lead to several possible consequences, including:
Potential Mitigations
- Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
- When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
- Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
References