CVE-2007-1651
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedCross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in OpenID allows remote attackers to restore the login session of a user on an OpenID enabled site via unspecified vectors related to an arbitrary remote web site and cached tokens, after the user has signed into an OpenID server, logged into the OpenID enabled site, and then logged out of the OpenID enabled site.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThis is a CSRF vulnerability in OpenID authentication that allows remote attackers to restore a user's login session on an OpenID-enabled site after logout. The attack exploits cached tokens in conjunction with an arbitrary remote website, enabling session hijacking after the user has completed a legitimate login/logout cycle with an OpenID provider.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify OpenID implementation in useSearch codebase for OpenID-related libraries (e.g., openid, python-openid, php-openid, openid4java) or look for OpenID authentication endpoints/handlersAffected if OpenID authentication is implemented without proper token handling on logout
-
Verify token invalidation on logoutExamine the logout code path to determine whether cached authentication tokens, session identifiers, or OpenID credentials are cleared when a user logs outAffected if Tokens or session data remain cached or valid after logout completes
-
Check session restoration endpoint for CSRF protectionLocate any endpoint that allows session or token restoration (re-authentication without fresh credentials) and verify whether it requires a unique CSRF token or similar protectionAffected if Session restoration can be triggered without CSRF protection and relies on cached tokens
-
Inspect token caching behaviorReview how OpenID tokens are stored (e.g., browser cookies, local storage, server-side session cache) and whether they persist beyond the logout actionAffected if Cached tokens remain valid or reusable after user-initiated logout
A user is affected if their OpenID-enabled application allows cached tokens to remain valid after logout and lacks CSRF protection on session restoration, enabling an attacker to hijack the session via a malicious site.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement proper token invalidation on logout and add CSRF protection tokens to session restoration requests; ensure cached credentials are securely cleared when users log out of OpenID-enabled sites.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,536.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-1651 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2007-1651 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data