CVE-2026-50628
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
A flaw was found in the OAuthRequestFilter component of cxf. A logic error in this filter inadvertently creates an inverse security check when enabled. This issue causes legitimate requests from a bound IP address to be rejected, while requests from any other IP address are blindly allowed. This could lead to unauthorized access to resources.
Statement
The Red Hat Product Security team has assessed the severity of this vulnerability as Important, given that it requires the attacker to first obtain a valid OAuth2 access token through a separate attack vector (such as token leakage, network interception, or log exposure) before exploitation is possible. Successful exploitation allows an attacker to replay a stolen token from any IP address, bypassing the sender-constrained token binding security control and gaining unauthorized access to protected resources as the legitimate token holder. The vulnerability's root cause is an inverted logic check in the IP binding validation of the cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2 module, which permits token usage from non-matching IP addresses instead of rejecting it.
Mitigation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base, or stability.
Additional information
- This content is not included.Bugzilla 2488302: cxf: org.apache.cxf/cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2: cxf: Unauthorized access due to logic error in OAuthRequestFilter
- Content from cwe.mitre.org is not included.CWE-358: Improperly Implemented Security Check for Standard
Affected Packages and Issued Red Hat Security Errata
Unless explicitly stated as not affected, all previous versions of packages in any minor update stream of a product listed here should be assumed vulnerable, although may not have been subject to full analysis.
| Products / Services | Components | State | Errata |
|---|---|---|---|
| Red Hat Fuse 7 | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2 | Fix deferred | |
| Red Hat Fuse 7 | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2-saml | Fix deferred | |
| Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform Expansion Pack | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2 | Not affected | |
| Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform Expansion Pack | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2-saml | Not affected | |
| Red Hat JBoss Web Server 5 | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2 | Fix deferred | |
| Red Hat JBoss Web Server 5 | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2-saml | Fix deferred | |
| Red Hat build of Apache Camel 4.18.1.P1 for Spring Boot 3.5.16 | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2 | Fixed | RHSA-2026:37390 |
| Red Hat build of Apache Camel 4.18.1.P1 for Spring Boot 3.5.16 | cxf-rt-rs-security-oauth2-saml | Fixed | RHSA-2026:37390 |
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authorities (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications ).
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS v3 Base Score | 7.4 | 9.8 | 9.8 |
| Attack Vector | Network | Network | Network |
| Attack Complexity | High | Low | Low |
| Privileges Required | None | None | None |
| User Interaction | None | None | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality Impact | High | High | High |
| Integrity Impact | High | High | High |
| Availability Impact | None | High | High |
CVSS v3 Vector
Red Hat CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
NVD CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cve.org CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?
For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.
My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?
- "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
- "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.
What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?
Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
- Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
- Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
- Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?
Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
- Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
- Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
- Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.
What is a mitigation?
I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?
Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?
My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.