Skip to content

OpenBao LDAP MFA Enforcement Bypass When Using Username As Alias

Moderate severity GitHub Reviewed Published Aug 8, 2025 in openbao/openbao • Updated Aug 8, 2025

Package

gomod github.com/openbao/openbao (Go)

Affected versions

>= 0.1.0, < 2.3.2
< 0.0.0-20250807212521-c52795c1ef74

Patched versions

2.3.2
0.0.0-20250807212521-c52795c1ef74

Description

Impact

OpenBao allows assignment of policies and MFA attribution based upon entity aliases, chosen by the underlying auth method. When using the username_as_alias=true parameter in the LDAP auth method, the caller-supplied username is used verbatim without normalization, allowing an attacker to bypass alias-specific MFA requirements.

Patches

OpenBao v2.3.2 will patch this issue.

Workarounds

LDAP methods are only vulnerable if using username_as_alias=true. Remove all usage of this parameter and update any entity aliases accordingly.

References

This issue was disclosed to HashiCorp and is the OpenBao equivalent of the following tickets:

References

@cipherboy cipherboy published to openbao/openbao Aug 8, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Aug 8, 2025
Reviewed Aug 8, 2025
Last updated Aug 8, 2025

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
High
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of Whitespace

The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could be interpreted as whitespace when they are sent to a downstream component. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2025-55001

GHSA ID

GHSA-2q8q-8fgw-9p6p

Source code

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.