CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2021-43777

CVE-2021-43777 — Vulnerability in Redash OAuth2 flows due to misuse of state field (should be a nonce)

Redash is a package for data visualization and sharing. In Redash version 10.0 and prior, the implementation of Google Login (via OAuth) incorrectly uses the `state` parameter to pass the next URL to redirect the user to after login. The `state` parameter should be used for a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) token, not a static and easily predicted value. This vulnerability does not affect users who do not use Google Login for their instance of Redash. A patch in the `master` and `release/10.x.x` branches addresses this by replacing `Flask-Oauthlib` with `Authlib` which automatically provides and validates a CSRF token for the state variable. The new implementation stores the next URL on the user session object. As a workaround, one may disable Google Login to mitigate the vulnerability.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M

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

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

getredash

redash

CVSS base

6.8

MEDIUM

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)

Products (1)

redash

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
6.8CVSS 3.1MEDIUM——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-352

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /10.x.x.

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

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.