CVE-2017-16897
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 · uneditedA vulnerability has been discovered in the Auth0 passport-wsfed-saml2 library affecting versions < 3.0.5. This vulnerability allows an attacker to impersonate another user and potentially elevate their privileges if the SAML identity provider does not sign the full SAML response (e.g., only signs the assertion within the response).
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 passport-wsfed-saml2 library before version 3.0.5 fails to properly validate SAML response signatures when the identity provider only signs the assertion rather than the full response. This allows an attacker to craft a malicious SAML response with a valid assertion signature but forged user identity, enabling impersonation and potential privilege escalation.
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< 3.0.5CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Locate the passport-wsfed-saml2 library in your projectSearch your project files for 'passport-wsfed-saml2' in package.json, package-lock.json, or the node_modules directoryAffected if The library is present in your dependencies
-
Determine the installed versionRun 'npm list passport-wsfed-saml2' or inspect the version field in your package.json or package-lock.json for this specific dependencyAffected if The version shown is lower than 3.0.5 (for example, 3.0.4, 3.0.3, etc.)
-
Verify the library is actively usedSearch your codebase for require('passport-wsfed-saml2') or import statements referencing this library, and check if it is instantiated in authentication middlewareAffected if The library is imported and used in your authentication flow
-
Identify your SAML identity provider configurationReview your SAML IdP metadata or configuration files to determine whether the IdP is configured to sign the full SAML response or only the assertionAffected if Your IdP signs only the assertion portion of the SAML response (not the entire response envelope)
You are affected if your project uses passport-wsfed-saml2 version below 3.0.5 AND your SAML identity provider signs only the assertion rather than the full response, allowing a forged user identity to be accepted.
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 data3.0.5
Upgrade the passport-wsfed-saml2 library to version 3.0.5 or later, which includes proper validation of the SAML response signature. Verify that the SAML identity provider is configured to sign the full response or ensure the library's validation logic is correctly implemented.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-16897 — 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-2017-16897 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