Advisories for Gem/Doorkeeper package

OAuth RFC 8252 says https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8252#section-8.6 the authorization server SHOULD NOT process authorization requests automatically without user consent or interaction, except when the identity of the client can be assured. This includes the case where the user has previously approved an authorization request for a given client id But Doorkeeper automatically processes authorization requests without user consent for public clients that have been previously approved. Public clients are inherently vulnerable to …

Doorkeeper contains an information disclosure vulnerability that allows an attacker to retrieve the client secret only intended for the OAuth application owner. After authorizing the application and allowing access, the attacker simply needs to request the list of their authorized applications in a JSON format (usually GET /oauth/authorized_applications.json). An application is vulnerable if the authorized application controller is enabled.

Doorkeeper contains a vulnerability in Token revocation API's authorized method that can result in Access tokens are not revoked for public OAuth apps, leaking access until expiry.

Stored XSS on the OAuth Client's name will cause users being prompted for consent via the implicit grant type to execute the XSS payload. The XSS attack could gain access to the user's active session, resulting in account compromise. Any user is susceptible if they click the authorization link for the malicious OAuth client. Because of how the links work, a user cannot tell if a link is malicious or …

Doorkeeper failed to implement OAuth Token Revocation (RFC ) in the following ways: Public clients making valid, unauthenticated calls to revoke a token would not have their token revoked Requests were not properly authenticating the client credentials but were, instead, looking at the access token in a second location Because of 2, the requests were also not authorizing confidential clients' ability to revoke a given token. It should only revoke …

The program stores sensitive information in production logs. This may allow a local attacker to gain access to sensitive information.

Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in doorkeeper allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of unspecified victims for requests that read a user OAuth authorization code via unknown vectors.

Doorkeeper contains a flaw as HTTP requests do not require multiple steps, explicit confirmation, or a unique token when performing certain sensitive actions. By tricking a user into following a specially crafted link, a context-dependent attacker can perform a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF / XSRF) attack causing the victim to disclose their access_token with an arbitrary scope.