Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2017-16852· NVD / CVE Program· CNA mitre

shibsp/metadata/DynamicMetadataProvider.cpp in the Dynamic MetadataProvider plugin in Shibboleth Service Provider before 2.6.1 fails to prop

shibsp/metadata/DynamicMetadataProvider.cpp in the Dynamic MetadataProvider plugin in Shibboleth Service Provider before 2.6.1 fails to properly configure itself with the MetadataFilter plugins and does not perform critical security checks such as signature verification, enforcement of validity periods, and other checks specific to deployments, aka SSPCPP-763.

HighCVSS 8.1 · v3.0—No exploit Fix available
Published
Nov 16, 2017
Updated
Jun 16, 2026
EPSS
1.1% · 64th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

32

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
32 / 40 · 8.1 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 1.1%

Affected systems

VendorProduct
shibbolethservice provider
debiandebian linux

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • debian debian linux8.0
  • debian debian linux9.0
  • shibboleth service providerbefore 2.6.1

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

EcosystemPackageAffected rangeFix
Debian:7shibboleth-sp2before 2.4.3+dfsg-5+deb7u22.4.3+dfsg-5+deb7u2
Debian:8shibboleth-sp2before 2.5.3+dfsg-2+deb8u12.5.3+dfsg-2+deb8u1
Debian:9shibboleth-sp2before 2.6.0+dfsg1-4+deb9u12.6.0+dfsg1-4+deb9u1
openSUSE:Tumbleweedsha1collisiondetectionbefore 3.2.3-1.23.2.3-1.2
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for Raspberry Pi 12 SP2shibboleth-spbefore 2.5.5-6.3.12.5.5-6.3.1

Same product

shibboleth: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2025-9943Unauthenticated SQL Injection Vulnerability in Shibboleth Service Provider
    36Monitor
  • CVE-2021-31826Shibboleth Service Provider 3.x before 3.2.2 is prone to a NULL pointer dereference flaw involving the session recovery feature.
    31Monitor
  • CVE-2019-19191Shibboleth Service Provider (SP) 3.x before 3.1.0 shipped a spec file that calls chown on files in a directory controlled by the service use
    31Monitor
  • CVE-2010-2450The keygen.sh script in Shibboleth SP 2.0 (located in /usr/local/etc/shibboleth by default) uses OpenSSL to create a DES private key which i
    30Monitor
  • CVE-2023-22947Insecure folder permissions in the Windows installation path of Shibboleth Service Provider (SP) before 3.4.1 allow an unprivileged local at
    29Monitor
  • CVE-2021-28963Shibboleth Service Provider before 3.2.1 allows content injection because template generation uses attacker-controlled parameters.
    21Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / packageFixed versionSource
debian:shibboleth-sp22.4.3+dfsg-5+deb7u2 · Debian:7Package registry (OSV)
opensuse:sha1collisiondetection3.2.3-1.2 · openSUSE:TumbleweedPackage registry (OSV)
suse:shibboleth-sp2.5.5-6.3.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for Raspberry Pi 12 SP2Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • No user action is required.
  • Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
high · data or configuration can be modified
Availability
high · the service can be disrupted
Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
High
Availability impact
High

Weakness class (CWE)

CWE-347 · Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

nvd-primary

Root cause

The verifier takes the algorithm to verify with from the token’s own header. Untrusted data ends up deciding its own verification rule.

The bug in code

The whole CWE-347 class

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

ts
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey);

Fixed

ts
const claims = jwt.verify(token, publicKey, {  algorithms: ["RS256"],  issuer: "https://id.example.com",  audience: "portal",});

Attack context

MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.

ATT&CK techniques

—

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Change log

  1. Fix✗ → ✓

For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records