CVE-2025-68158 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.7) Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in authlib. A fix is available for authlib — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Authlib: 1-click Account Takeover
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2025-68158.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2025-68158 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
authlibReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Security Advisory: Cache-Backed State Storage CSRF in Authlib
The Security Labs team at Snyk has reported a security issue affecting Authlib, identified during a recent research project.
The Snyk Security Labs team has identified a vulnerability that can result in a one-click account takeover in applications that utilize the Authlib library.
Description
Cache-backed state/request-token storage is not tied to the initiating user session, making CSRF possible for any attacker that possesses a valid state value (easily obtainable via an attacker-initiated authentication flow). When a cache is supplied to the OAuth client registry, FrameworkIntegration.set_state_data writes the entire state blob under _state_{app}_{state}, and get_state_data disregards the caller's session entirely. [1][2]
def _get_cache_data(self, key):
value = self.cache.get(key)
if not value:
return None
try:
return json.loads(value)
except (TypeError, ValueError):
return None
[snip]
def get_state_data(self, session, state):
key = f"_state_{self.name}_{state}"
if self.cache:
value = self._get_cache_data(key)
else:
value = session.get(key)
if value:
return value.get("data")
return None
authlib/integrations/base_client/framework_integration.py:12-41
Retrieval in authorize_access_token therefore succeeds for whichever browser presents that opaque value, and the token exchange proceeds with the attacker's authorization code. [3]
def authorize_access_token(self, **kwargs):
"""Fetch access token in one step.
:return: A token dict.
"""
params = request.args.to_dict(flat=True)
state = params.get("oauth_token")
if not state:
raise OAuthError(description='Missing "oauth_token" parameter')
data = self.framework.get_state_data(session, state)
if not data:
raise OAuthError(description='Missing "request_token" in temporary data')
params["request_token"] = data["request_token"]
params.update(kwargs)
self.framework.clear_state_data(session, state)
token = self.fetch_access_token(**params)
self.token = token
return token
authlib/integrations/flask_client/apps.py:57-76
This opens up an avenue for Login CSRF in applications that use cache-backed storage. Depending on the dependent application's implementation (e.g., whether it links accounts in the event of a login CSRF), this could lead to account takeover.
Proof of Concept
Consider a hypothetical application — AwesomeAuthlibApp. Assume that AwesomeAuthlibApp contains internal logic such that, when an already authenticated user performs a callback request, the application links the newly provided SSO identity to the existing user account associated with that request.
Under these conditions, an attacker can achieve account takeover within the application by performing the following actions:
- The attacker initiates an SSO OAuth flow but halts the process immediately before the callback request is made to AwesomeAuthlibApp.
- The attacker then induces a logged-in user (via phishing, a drive-by attack, or similar means) to perform a GET request containing the attacker's state value and authorization code to the AwesomeAuthlibApp callback endpoint. Because Authlib does not verify whether the state token is bound to the session performing the callback, the callback is processed, the authorization code is sent to the provider, and the account linking proceeds.
Once the GET request is executed, the attacker's SSO account becomes permanently linked to the victim's AwesomeAuthlibApp account.
Suggested Fix
Per the OAuth RFC [4], the state parameter should be tied to the user's session to prevent exactly such scenarios. One straightforward method of mitigating this issue is to continue storing the state in the session even when caching is enabled.
An alternative approach would be to hash the session ID (or another per-user secret derived from the session) into the cache key. This ensures the state remains stored in the cache while still being bound to the session of the user that initiated the OAuth flow.
Resources
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐍PyPI | authlib | ≥ 1.0.0&&< 1.6.6 | 1.6.6pip install --upgrade 'authlib==1.6.6' |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for authlib, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update authlib to 1.6.6 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2025-68158 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2025-68158 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2025-68158. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Fixing This On Your OS
If you run this on a Linux distribution, patch through your package manager against the distro's own security advisory below — it tracks the exact backported fix for your release, which can ship on a different timeline (and sometimes a different severity) than the upstream project.
This vulnerability is rated Moderate for Red Hat products utilizing Authlib, such as Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Hosted OpenShift Clusters, Red Hat Quay, and Red Hat Satellite. The flaw arises from improper session management in Authlib's cache-backed state storage, allowing a remote attacker to perform…
| Product | Fixed in | Advisory |
|---|---|---|
| Red Hat Quay 3.15 | quay/quay-rhel8:1775169219 | RHSA-2026:6568 |
| Red Hat Quay 3.16 | quay/quay-rhel9:1775069491 | RHSA-2026:6497 |
| Red Hat Quay 3.16 | quay/quay-rhel9:1775169226 | RHSA-2026:6567 |
| Red Hat Satellite 6.18 | satellite/foreman-mcp-server-rhel9:1782228427 | RHSA-2026:28405 |
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2025-68158 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2025-68158 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.