CVE Tools

CVE-2020-26250

Base class whitelist configuration ignored in OAuthenticator

Public exploit available. Not confirmed exploited in the wild yet. A vendor fix is available.

Published Updated Sources: CVE.org, NVD, GitHub

What to do

The vendor has published a fix. Version details are below where the sources state them.

What it is

From the CVE record

OAuthenticator is an OAuth login mechanism for JupyterHub. In oauthenticator from version 0.12.0 and before 0.12.2, the deprecated (in jupyterhub 1.2) configuration `Authenticator.whitelist`, which should be transparently mapped to `Authenticator.allowed_users` with a warning, is instead ignored by OAuthenticator classes, resulting in the same behavior as if this configuration has not been set. If this is the only mechanism of authorization restriction (i.e. no group or team restrictions in configuration) then all authenticated users will be allowed. Provider-based restrictions, including deprecated values such as `GitHubOAuthenticator.org_whitelist` are **not** affected. All users of OAuthenticator 0.12.0 and 0.12.1 with JupyterHub 1.2 (JupyterHub Helm chart 0.10.0-0.10.5) who use the `admin.whitelist.users` configuration in the jupyterhub helm chart or the `c.Authenticator.whitelist` configuration directly. Users of other deprecated configuration, e.g. `c.GitHubOAuthenticator.team_whitelist` are **not** affected. If you see a log line like this and expect a specific list of allowed usernames: "[I 2020-11-27 16:51:54.528 JupyterHub app:1717] Not using allowed_users. Any authenticated user will be allowed." you are likely affected. Updating oauthenticator to 0.12.2 is recommended. A workaround is to replace the deprecated `c.Authenticator.whitelist = ...` with `c.Authenticator.allowed_users = ...`. If any users have been authorized during this time who should not have been, they must be deleted via the API or admin interface, per the referenced documentation.

In plain language

No plain-language summary for this CVE yet.

Exploitation

Where each signal puts this CVE on the scale from published to confirmed exploited.

EPSS65th
Public exploit
CISA KEV

Not in the catalog. CISA has not confirmed exploitation.

Public exploits

1 source with a proof of concept or module.

Exploit links, PoCs and Metasploit modules after sign-in
EPSS

1.1% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the 65th percentile of scored CVEs.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST.org. A probability, not a confirmation.

Lifecycle

The patch came 471 days before any public exploit.

  1. Public exploit / PoCsource: github-poc
  2. Patch availablerecord updated
  3. Publishedweakness classified, att&ck mapped

Affected products

Technical detail

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N

Scored 6.3 by NVD.

How it is reached

  • Attack Vector NetworkExploitable remotely over the network without any special conditions
  • Attack Complexity HighRequires specific conditions like a race condition or non-default configuration
  • Privileges Required LowRequires basic user-level privileges
  • User Interaction NoneNo user interaction needed — fully automated exploitation

Scope

  • Scope ChangedThe exploit can affect other components (e.g. sandbox escape, host compromise from VM)

Impact if exploited

  • Confidentiality HighTotal information disclosure — all data in the component is compromised
  • Integrity NoneNo integrity impact
  • Availability NoneNo availability impact

Weaknesses

ATT&CK techniques

Mapped from the weaknesses above (CWE to ATT&CK), not observed in attacks.

Sources

Watch the software you run.

My Stack ranks new CVEs for your products by real-world exploitation, so the next serious one reaches you without reading every advisory.

We'll flag the next CVE, public exploit or patch for Oauthenticator, not every advisory. This one: public exploit.

We use analytics cookies to see which pages and articles actually help people. Decline and none of them run — the site works the same. What we store