Plack::Middleware::OAuth versions through 0.10 for Perl do not support the OAuth 2.0 state parameter.
RequestTokenV2 builds the provider authorization redirect without issuing a state value, and AccessTokenV2 exchanges the callback code and registers the resulting token into the session (register_session) without verifying that the callback corresponds to an authorization request this session initiated.
Any application that uses this middleware for OAuth 2.0 login is exposed to login cross-site request forgery: because the callback is not bound to the session that began the flow, an attacker who starts an authorization with their own provider account can deliver the resulting callback to a victim, causing the victims session to complete the attackers authorization and associating the attackers provider identity and access token with that session. Where the application persists this as an account link, the attacker may retain access to the victims account through their own provider credentials.
Weakness
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
Potential Mitigations
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
- For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330]
- Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
- Use the “double-submitted cookie” method as described by Felten and Zeller:
- When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user’s machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same.
- Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult.
- This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
Related Attack Patterns
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/111.html
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/462.html
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/467.html
- https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/62.html
References
- https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-10.12
- https://github.com/c9s/Plack-Middleware-OAuth/pull/13
- https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=179874
- https://security.metacpan.org/patches/P/Plack-Middleware-OAuth/0.10/CVE-2026-12740-r1.patch
- http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/07/04/10