CVE-2015-0277
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 · uneditedThe Service Provider (SP) in PicketLink before 2.7.0 does not ensure that it is a member of an Audience element when an AudienceRestriction is specified, which allows remote attackers to log in to other users' accounts via a crafted SAML assertion. NOTE: this identifier has been SPLIT per ADT2 due to different vulnerability types. See CVE-2015-6254 for lack of validation for the Destination attribute in a Response element in a SAML assertion.
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 · high confidenceThe Service Provider in PicketLink versions prior to 2.7.0 fails to validate that it is a legitimate audience member when processing SAML assertions containing an AudienceRestriction element. This allows an attacker to craft a malicious SAML assertion valid for a different SP and use it to authenticate as another user, achieving unauthorized access to legitimate user accounts.
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 data<= 2.6.0CVSS 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
- Single
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:S/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 PicketLink versionLocate the PicketLink JAR files or dependency management in your project (pom.xml, WAR file, or application library directory) and check the version number against the affected range (2.6.0 and earlier).Affected if The installed version is 2.6.0 or any earlier version.
-
Confirm SAML authentication is in useReview your application configuration files for SAML-based authentication setup. Look for PicketLink identity (IDM) configuration files that define SAML-based single sign-on, particularly files referencing 'SAML' or 'SAML2' service provider configuration.Affected if Your application uses PicketLink to process incoming SAML assertions for authentication.
-
Check for AudienceRestriction in SAML assertionsInspect incoming SAML assertion processing logic or logs to determine whether the system processes assertions containing the AudienceRestriction condition. This may be visible in SAML metadata or assertion consumer service configuration.Affected if Your SP receives and processes SAML assertions that include an AudienceRestriction element.
You are affected if you run PicketLink version 2.6.0 or earlier AND your application processes SAML assertions containing an AudienceRestriction element for authentication.
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 dataUpgrade PicketLink to version 2.7.0 or later which includes proper AudienceRestriction validation. If upgrade is not immediately feasible, implement manual validation ensuring the local SP is listed in the Audience element before accepting any SAML assertion.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-0277 — 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-2015-0277 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