Start with Identity
Identity CVE · SAML

CVE-2025-54572ruby-saml auth bypass, incomplete fix of CVE-2025-25292

critical
Product: ruby-samlVendor: SAML-ToolkitsCWE-347Disclosed: 2025-07-30Status: PatchedProtocol deep diveNVD ↗

What broke

The March 2025 ruby-saml patches for CVE-2025-25291 and CVE-2025-25292 left a parser-differential path open. CVE-2025-54572 is that leftover: an attacker can still construct a SAML response that verifies on one XML tree and authenticates as a different user on the other.

Why it matters

Incomplete fixes are how signature-wrapping stays in production for a year. Teams that closed the March ticket and moved on were still impersonable. This is also why "we patched ruby-saml in Q1" is not an answer an auditor should accept in late 2025.

What to do

  • Confirm the running version is 1.18.1 or later, not "we patched in March."
  • Re-test ACS handling with a known wrapping fixture after every library bump. Regression tests are how you catch the next incomplete fix, including CVE-2025-66567.
  • Rotate signing keys if the SP was reachable while on the incomplete patch.

After you patch

A SAML bypass means the service provider accepted an assertion it should have rejected, so anyone who exploited it authenticated as a real user and left a normal-looking log line.

  • Revoke every session issued by the affected service provider, then rotate its session signing keys. Patching stops new forgeries and does nothing about sessions already minted.
  • Audit administrative accounts and group memberships for changes during the exposure window. Signing in as an administrator is the point of this class, and adding a second account is the standard persistence step.
  • Rotate the identity provider signing certificate if the flaw involved signature validation, and confirm the service provider pins the expected certificate rather than trusting anything in the assertion.
  • Check your own implementation for the same class: exact-match comparison on verification results, rejection of unexpected signature algorithms, and audience and recency checks on every assertion. See SAML 2.0 and SAML vs OIDC.

Sources

Last reviewed By SWI Community TeamSuggest a correctionHow we research

Technique

This CVE is an instance of Federation trust abuse and SAML forgery. A service provider that accepts a SAML assertion it should have rejected treats a forged identity as authenticated, because the failure sits in signature validation code, not in cryptography.

Know a primary source we should add, or a patch status that has changed? Email community@startwithidentity.com. See all briefs in the identity CVE catalog, or volunteer as a CVE Analyst.
Compiled from vendor advisories, NVD, CISA KEV, and public research. CVSS figures can disagree across NVD and the CNA. Confirm affected versions against the vendor advisory before you patch. Independent, community-driven analysis. See the disclaimer.