CVE-2021-25312
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 · uneditedHTCondor before 8.9.11 allows a user to submit a job as another user on the system, because of a flaw in the IDTOKENS authentication method.
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 confidenceHTCondor before version 8.9.11 contains a flaw in the IDTOKENS authentication method that allows a user to submit jobs as another user on the system. This is a privilege escalation vulnerability where the authentication mechanism fails to properly validate the identity of the submitting user, enabling unauthorized job submission under another user's account.
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>= 8.9.2, < 8.9.11CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Check HTCondor version installedRun `condor_version` or `condor_q -version` to see the installed version number. If using a package manager, also run `rpm -q htcondor` or `dpkg -l htcondor` to verify the package version.Affected if The version shown is less than 8.9.11 but greater than or equal to 8.9.2 (for example, 8.9.5, 8.9.10)
-
Verify IDTOKENS authentication is configuredInspect HTCondor configuration files for IDTOKENS settings. Check /etc/condor/condor_config and any secondary config files for lines containing IDTOKENS, such as ALLOW_DAEMON or ALLOW_WRITE settings that reference IDTOKENS.Affected if IDTOKENS authentication method is explicitly configured or enabled in the configuration files
-
Check if IDTOKENS is in the authentication poolLook for IDTOKENS in the SEC_DEFAULT_AUTHENTICATION_METHODS or similar authentication method settings in the HTCondor configuration.Affected if IDTOKENS is listed among the enabled authentication methods (SEC_DEFAULT_AUTHENTICATION_METHODS includes IDTOKENS)
-
Review authentication logs for suspicious job submissionsExamine HTCondor logs in /var/log/condor/ for job submission events, particularly looking for submissions where the authenticated user differs from the submission target user.Affected if Logs show job submissions where the submitting user identity does not match the expected user, especially in environments using IDTOKENS
Your environment is affected if HTCondor version is 8.9.2 through 8.9.10 AND IDTOKENS authentication is configured or in use.
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 data8.9.11
Upgrade HTCondor to version 8.9.11 or later to patch the IDTOKENS authentication flaw. After upgrading, verify that IDTOKENS are being validated correctly and consider reviewing authentication logs for any suspicious job submissions.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-25312 — 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-2021-25312 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