CVE-2021-26905
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 · unedited1Password SCIM Bridge before 1.6.2 mishandles validation of authenticated requests for log files, leading to disclosure of a TLS private key.
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 1Password SCIM Bridge before version 1.6.2 contains a vulnerability where validation of authenticated requests for log files is improperly handled. This flaw allows an authenticated attacker to access log files that should be restricted, and through this access pattern, obtain a TLS private key used by the SCIM Bridge.
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>= 1.0.0, < 1.6.2CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 if 1Password SCIM Bridge is deployedSearch your container registry, Kubernetes cluster, or infrastructure for resources related to 1Password SCIM Bridge such as containers, pods, deployments, or services named 'scim' or '1password-scim'. Check your Docker, Kubernetes, or orchestration configuration files for scim-bridge references.Affected if 1Password SCIM Bridge is present in your environment
-
Determine the installed versionCheck the version of your deployed SCIM Bridge. For container deployments, inspect the container image tag (e.g., 'docker images' or container registry tags). For Helm deployments, check 'helm list' and the chart version. For Kubernetes, inspect the deployment YAML for the image tag including version.Affected if The version cannot be determined or is within the range 1.0.0 to less than 1.6.2
-
Compare version against affected rangeIf a version number was obtained, verify it falls within the affected range: 1.0.0 <= version < 1.6.2. Any version from 1.0.0 through 1.6.1 is vulnerable.Affected if The installed version is 1.0.0, 1.1.x, 1.2.x, 1.3.x, 1.4.x, 1.5.x, or 1.6.0 or 1.6.1
-
Check for log file access anomaliesReview access logs, audit logs, or web server logs for the SCIM Bridge for unusual GET requests to log file paths. Look for requests to paths like /logs, /var/log, or similar endpoints that may indicate log file enumeration.Affected if Unusual or unauthorized access patterns to log files are found in the SCIM Bridge logs
Your environment is affected if 1Password SCIM Bridge is deployed and the installed version is 1.0.0 or higher but lower than 1.6.2.
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 data1.6.2
Upgrade 1Password SCIM Bridge to version 1.6.2 or later to remediate this vulnerability. After upgrading, rotate the exposed TLS private key and any credentials that may have been compromised.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-26905 — 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-2021-26905 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