@node-saml/node-saml's validatePostRequestAsync does not include checkTimestampsValidityErrorGHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw
MEDIUMFix: node-saml/node-saml@045e3b9GHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) CWE-347 vulnerability in @node-saml/node-saml. A fix is available for @node-saml/node-saml — see the affected versions and patch details below.
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.
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
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
How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.
@node-saml/node-samlnpmDescription
Summary
The lack of checking of current timestamp allows a LogoutRequest XML to be reused multiple times even when the current time is past the NotOnOrAfter.
Details
It was noticed that in the validatePostRequestAsync() flow in saml.js, the current timestamp is never checked. This could present a vulnerability where a user who has an XML LogoutRequest could validated it if the IssueInstance and the NotOnOrAfter are valid along with valid credentials (signature, certificate etc.).
PoC
I was able to validate a sample valid LogoutRequest XML multiple times through postman by sending it to my endpoint regardless if the current present time was past the NotOnOrAfter time. After some further testing, it seems that only the IssueInstance is checked against NotOnOrAfter. Not sure if this was the intended behaviour but I believe having a never expiring valid LogoutRequest could be dangerous.
Impact
This could impact the user where they would be logged out from an expired LogoutRequest. In bigger contexts, if LogoutRequests are sent out in mass to different SPs, this could impact many users on a large scale.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | @node-saml/node-saml | all versions | 4.0.5npm install @node-saml/node-saml@4.0.5 |
Affected Products
node samlnode_saml_projectDetection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @node-saml/node-saml, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update @node-saml/node-saml to 4.0.5 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
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
Is GHSA-vx8m-6fhw-pccw in your dependencies?
Find it across npm, including transitive dependencies.