
Loading

Loading
We use strictly necessary cookies to run this site, and analytics cookies to understand how it's used. See our Privacy Policy for details.
A GitHub-reviewed security advisory, not necessarily under active exploitation the way our CISA KEV advisories are, but a real, disclosed vulnerability in an open-source dependency.
Affected packages
Vulnerable: >= 0.7.1, < 2.2.2
Patched in 2.2.2
Details
The callback Base64-decodes the posted XML, reads NameID and attributes, resolves or provisions the user, and mints a gpustack_session JWT — but never calls OneLogin_Saml2_Auth.process_response(), the step that verifies the signature, issuer, audience, destination, and time conditions.
No credentials are required, and SAML SSO does not even need to be configured. The callback processes the payload and issues a session regardless of whether SAML is set up, so every deployment is affected, not only SAML-enabled ones. Anyone who can reach the endpoint over the network can authenticate as an arbitrary identity by posting a response that names it:
Administrator access grants full control over the deployment and the infrastructure it manages. Because Response/Assertion IDs are never consumed, a captured signed response also replays indefinitely.
Precondition: network reachability to /auth/saml/callback. SAML SSO configuration is not required. A full proof-of-concept is available privately to maintainers.
Fixed in gpustack 2.2.2:
There is no effective configuration-level workaround — disabling or not configuring SAML does not mitigate this on affected versions, since the callback runs regardless. Until upgraded, block network access to /auth/saml/callback (e.g. at a reverse proxy / ingress).
Reported privately by Austin Chu, Sohee Kim, and Corban Villa (UC Berkeley security research project), and independently, earlier, by a researcher who wishes to remain anonymous.
EPSS, exploit probability
Low0.26%
estimated chance of real-world exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 17.6% of every CVE FIRST.org scores
Refreshed 11/10/2026, via FIRST.org's EPSS model, not CVSS, this measures likelihood of exploitation, not how severe it would be.
More pip advisories
Talk to us about this
Find out whether this dependency (or others like it) is actually reachable in your codebase.
Get help patching, or building dependency-scanning into your pipeline going forward.
A secure code review or supply chain review finds this before an advisory does.