CVE-2020-5425 — User Impersonation possible in Tanzu SSO

Single Sign-On for Vmware Tanzu all versions prior to 1.11.3 ,1.12.x versions prior to 1.12.4 and 1.13.x prior to 1.13.1 are vulnerable to user impersonation attack.If two users are logged in to the SSO operator dashboard at the same time, with the same username, from two different identity providers, one can acquire the token of the other and thus operate with their permissions. Note: Foundation may be vulnerable only if: 1) The system zone is set up to use a SAML identity provider 2) There are internal users that have the same username as users in the external SAML provider 3) Those duplicate-named users have the scope to access the SSO operator dashboard 4) The vulnerability doesn't appear with LDAP because of chained authentication.

Published Oct 31, 2020Updated Sep 17, 2024Sources: cvelistV5, pivotal

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

vmware tanzu

single_sign_on_for_vmware_tanzu

CVSS base

7.5

HIGH

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

vmware tanzu

Products (1)

single sign on for vmware tanzu

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
7.5	CVSS 3.0	HIGH	—	—	cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-287

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

T1548Abuse Elevation Control Mechanism
T1040Network Sniffing
T1185Browser Session Hijacking

References

1 on the record

tanzu.vmware.com/security/cve-2020-5425
x_refsource_CONFIRM

Elsewhere on this site

vmware tanzuevery CVE for this vendor
CWE-287other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.