CVE-2025-54419
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 SAML library not dependent on any frameworks that runs in Node. In version 5.0.1, Node-SAML loads the assertion from the (unsigned) original response document. This is different than the parts that are verified when checking signature. This allows an attacker to modify authentication details within a valid SAML assertion. For example, in one attack it is possible to remove any character from the SAML assertion username. To conduct the attack an attacker would need a validly signed document from the identity provider (IdP). This is fixed in version 5.1.0.
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 confidenceNode-SAML library versions before 5.1.0 validate the signature on one portion of a SAML response but then load the assertion from a different, unsigned portion of the original response document. This allows an attacker with a validly signed SAML document from the IdP to modify authentication details (e.g., username) in the unsigned portion while the signature remains valid.
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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/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.
-
Locate Node-SAML dependencyInspect your project's package.json file for the @node-saml/node-saml package, or check node_modules/@node-saml/node-saml/package.json for the version field.Affected if Node-SAML is present in dependencies
-
Determine installed Node-SAML versionRun 'npm list @node-saml/node-saml' or read the version from node_modules/@node-saml/node-saml/package.jsonAffected if The version shown is earlier than 5.1.0
-
Verify SAML authentication is in useSearch codebase for imports of @node-saml/node-saml and usage of SAML-based authentication functions such as executeSAMLFlow, processValidSAMLRequest, or equivalent entry points.Affected if SAML authentication using Node-SAML is implemented in the application
You are affected if Node-SAML version earlier than 5.1.0 is installed and your application uses it for SAML 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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Node-SAML to version 5.1.0 or later. Alternatively, implement secondary validation of assertion contents against expected values after the library's built-in verification.
5.1.0
- Check the current version of node-saml in your project by running 'npm list node-saml' or inspecting package.json
- Update node-saml to version 5.1.0 or later using 'npm install [email protected]' or 'npm update node-saml'
- Verify the update was successful by running 'npm list node-saml' and confirming version 5.1.0 or higher is installed
- Test the SAML authentication flow to ensure the fix properly validates assertions from the signed document rather than the original response
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2025-54419 — 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-2025-54419 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