CVE-2025-11273
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 was found in LaChatterie Verger up to 1.2.10. This impacts the function redirectToAuthorization of the file /src/main/services/mcp/oauth/provider.ts. The manipulation of the argument URL results in deserialization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 confidenceA deserialization vulnerability exists in the redirectToAuthorization function within the OAuth provider (mcp/oauth/provider.ts) of LaChatterie Verger up to v1.2.10. The function accepts a URL argument that is improperly handled, allowing malicious serialized data to be processed. This can be exploited remotely via crafted URLs.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 LaChatterie Verger installation and versionLocate the application installation directory and check the package.json, version file, or similar metadata for the version numberAffected if Version is v1.2.10 or lower (including unversioned installations)
-
Locate the OAuth provider moduleSearch for the file mcp/oauth/provider.ts in the application codebase and verify it existsAffected if The file exists and contains the redirectToAuthorization function
-
Verify OAuth functionality is enabledCheck application configuration files, environment variables, or startup logs for OAuth provider initialization (look for 'oauth', 'OAuth', or 'mcp/oauth' references)Affected if OAuth provider is configured or enabled in the runtime configuration
-
Inspect redirectToAuthorization function usageSearch codebase for calls to redirectToAuthorization and check if URL parameters are passed directly from request input without validationAffected if The function accepts URL parameters from external input without sanitization
-
Check redirect URI configurationExamine OAuth configuration for allowed redirect URIs; look for any whitelist or validation logic on redirect URLs in the codebaseAffected if No whitelist-based redirect URI validation exists, or validation relies on deserialization of untrusted data
You are affected if running LaChatterie Verger v1.2.10 or lower with OAuth functionality enabled and the redirectToAuthorization function accepts unvalidated URL parameters.
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 strict input validation on the URL parameter in redirectToAuthorization, ensuring only trusted/allowed URLs are processed. Consider using a whitelist approach for redirect URIs and avoid deserializing untrusted data.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-11273 — 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-2025-11273 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