Skip to main content

Zitadel CVE-2026-55672

| EUVDEUVD-2026-42979 HIGH
Improper Authentication (CWE-287)
2026-06-18 https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel GHSA-xqxv-4jc2-x56x
7.4
CVSS 3.1 · Vendor: https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel
Share

Severity by source

Vendor (https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel) PRIMARY
7.4 HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
vuln.today AI
6.8 MEDIUM

Network-reachable token endpoint (AV:N); attacker must first steal a code/token via external weakness (AC:H); requires credentials for a second registered OAuth client (PR:L); no user interaction; victim confidentiality and integrity high, no availability impact.

3.1 AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
4.0 AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
SUSE
HIGH
qualitative

Primary rating from Vendor (https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel).

CVSS VectorVendor: https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel

Attack Vector
Network
Attack Complexity
High
Privileges Required
None
User Interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

Lifecycle Timeline

3
Source Code Evidence Fetched
Jun 18, 2026 - 14:30 vuln.today
Analysis Generated
Jun 18, 2026 - 14:30 vuln.today
CVE Published
Jun 18, 2026 - 13:52 github-advisory
HIGH 7.4

DescriptionCVE.org

Summary

Zitadel's OAuth2 / OIDC CodeExchange and RefreshToken implementations omit a critical validation step to ensure that the requesting client matches the client that originally initiated the authorization flow. This violates RFC 6749 Section 4.1.3, which mandates that the authorization server must ensure the authorization code was issued to the authenticated confidential client.

Impact

This flaw creates potential vulnerabilities in two main authentication phases, provided specific external preconditions are met:

  • Authorization Code Injection: An attacker who intercepts an authorization code (via an independent application vulnerability such as XSS, referrer leakage, log access, or network interception) can exchange it using credentials from a completely different client (ClientB) registered on the same Zitadel instance. Zitadel will authenticate ClientB and issue tokens for the victim user without verifying the client binding.
  • Refresh Token Cross-Use: An attacker who successfully steals a valid refresh token (via an external application exploit or data leak) can present it under a different client identity. Zitadel validates the token's format and expiration but fails to enforce client binding, allowing the attacker to maintain persistent access from an unauthorized client.
  • Device Authorization Cross-Use: An attacker who intercepts or manipulates a device authorization flow grant can finalize the exchange using a different client context than the one that initiated the device session, bypassing intended client boundaries.

Scope and Mitigation Factors:

  • External Preconditions: It is critical to note that exploiting either vector requires a pre-existing vulnerability or data leak within the target application environment to intercept the code or token in the first place. Securing the application layer against token theft remains outside the scope of Zitadel.
  • Multi-tenant risk: On shared or multi-tenant instances, a client belonging to one tenant could theoretically exploit codes/tokens belonging to another tenant's clients if they are successfully intercepted.
  • PKCE protection: Clients strictly using PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange) are partially mitigated against the authorization code injection vector, as the attacker would still require the code_verifier. However, PKCE does not protect against refresh token cross-use.

Affected Versions

Systems running one of the following versions are affected:

  • 4.x: 4.0.0 through 4.15.1 (including RC versions)
  • 3.x: 3.0.0 through 3.4.11 (including RC versions)

Patches

The vulnerability has been addressed in the latest releases by re-introducing strict client identity validation on the CodeExchange and RefreshToken grants.

Please upgrade to one of the following secure versions:

Workarounds

The recommended solution is to upgrade to a patched version.

To reduce exposure in the interim, ensure absolute adherence to application security best practices to prevent credential/token theft, enforce the use of PKCE for all clients to mitigate the Authorization Code Injection risk, and minimize refresh token lifespans.

Questions

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory, please email us at [security@zitadel.com](mailto:security@zitadel.com)

Credits

Thanks to kodareef5, Shubham Raj / Causal Security, and Gaurav Popalghat for identifying and responsibly reporting this or a part of this vulnerability.

AnalysisAI

Authentication bypass in Zitadel identity platform (versions 3.0.0-3.4.11 and 4.0.0-4.15.1) allows an attacker who has obtained a victim's authorization code, refresh token, or device authorization grant to redeem it under a different OAuth client registered on the same instance, because the server fails to validate the client_id binding required by RFC 6749 §4.1.3. No public exploit identified at time of analysis; CVSS 7.4 with high attack complexity reflects the requirement that the attacker first intercept the code or token through a separate weakness such as XSS, log exposure, or referrer leakage.

Technical ContextAI

Zitadel is an open-source identity and access management platform written in Go that acts as an OAuth 2.0 / OIDC authorization server (pkg:go/github.com/zitadel/zitadel). The flaw is a CWE-287 (Improper Authentication) defect in the OIDC token endpoint: the CodeExchange, RefreshToken, and device-code grant handlers omit the check that the authenticated confidential client presenting the credential matches the client that originated the authorization request. RFC 6749 §4.1.3 explicitly requires this binding so that a stolen code or refresh token cannot be replayed by a different client. The upstream fix (commit 0973b074b4) reintroduces the comparison and is covered by new integration tests that assert the error client_id does not correspond to the client_id in the authorization request / …in the refresh token.

RemediationAI

Vendor-released patch: upgrade 4.x deployments to 4.15.2 or later (https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/releases/tag/v4.15.2) and 3.x deployments to 3.4.12 or later (https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/releases/tag/v3.4.12), which reintroduce strict client_id binding on CodeExchange, RefreshToken, and device-code exchange per commit 0973b074b48816757c47fe732b06d2488d3d284c. Until you can upgrade, enforce PKCE on every OAuth client to blunt the authorization-code-injection vector (note this does not protect refresh tokens or device-code flows), shorten refresh token lifetimes and enable rotation so a stolen token has a small window of use (trade-off: more frequent re-auth and replay-detection events), audit application-layer logs, referrer policies, and client-side code for XSS or token-leak channels that would supply the prerequisite stolen credential, and on multi-tenant instances consider temporarily disabling cross-tenant client registration or isolating tenants until patched. Full advisory: https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/security/advisories/GHSA-xqxv-4jc2-x56x.

Vendor StatusVendor

SUSE

Severity: Important
Product Status
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 16.1 Affected
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.1 Affected
SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Package Hub 15 SP5 Affected
SUSE Linux Enterprise Module for Package Hub 15 SP6 Affected
openSUSE Leap 15.5 Affected

Share

CVE-2026-55672 vulnerability details – vuln.today

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy