⚠️ CVE-2025-25427: A Stored cross-site scripting ... ⚠️ CVE-2025-3509: A Remote Code Execution (RCE) ... ⚠️ CVE-2025-3246: An improper neutralization of ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3124: A missing authorization vulner... 🟢 CVE-2024-42178: HCL MyXalytics is affected by ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3765: A vulnerability, which was cla... 🟡 CVE-2025-3764: A vulnerability classified as ... 🟢 CVE-2024-42177: HCL MyXalytics is affected by ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3763: A vulnerability classified as ... 🟡 CVE-2025-3762: A vulnerability was found in P... 🟡 CVE-2025-29722: A CSRF vulnerability in Commer... 🟡 CVE-2025-28101: An arbitrary file deletion vul... 🔥 CVE-2025-28009: A SQL Injection vulnerability ... 🟢 CVE-2025-26269: DragonflyDB Dragonfly through ... 🟢 CVE-2025-26268: DragonflyDB Dragonfly before 1... ⚠️ CVE-2024-55211: An issue in Think Router Tk-Rt... 🟢 CVE-2021-47671: In the Linux kernel, the follo... ⚠️ CVE-2021-47670: In the Linux kernel, the follo... ⚠️ CVE-2021-47669: In the Linux kernel, the follo... ⚠️ CVE-2021-47668: In the Linux kernel, the follo... 🟢 CVE-2025-32415: In libxml2 before 2.13.8 and 2... ⚠️ CVE-2025-2947: IBM i 7.6  contains a privile... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29661: Litepubl CMS <= 7.0.9 is vulne... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29181: FOXCMS <= V1.25 is vulnerable ... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29180: In FOXCMS <=1.25, the installd... ⚠️ CVE-2025-29039: An issue in dlink DIR 832x 240... ⚠️ CVE-2025-43015: In JetBrains RubyMine before 2... 🟡 CVE-2025-43014: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... 🟡 CVE-2025-43013: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... ⚠️ CVE-2025-43012: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... 🟡 CVE-2025-42921: In JetBrains Toolbox App befor... 🔥 CVE-2025-39596: Weak Authentication vulnerabil... 🔥 CVE-2025-39595: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39594: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🔥 CVE-2025-39588: Deserialization of Untrusted D... 🔥 CVE-2025-39587: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39586: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39583: Missing Authorization vulnerab... 🟡 CVE-2025-39580: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39569: Improper Neutralization of Spe... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39568: Improper Limitation of a Pathn... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39567: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39562: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39559: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39558: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39554: Missing Authorization vulnerab... 🔥 CVE-2025-39551: Deserialization of Untrusted D... 🔥 CVE-2025-39550: Deserialization of Untrusted D... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39542: Incorrect Privilege Assignment... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39535: Authentication Bypass Using an... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39533: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39532: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39527: Deserialization of Untrusted D... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39526: Improper Control of Filename f... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39521: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39519: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39464: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39462: Improper Control of Filename f... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39461: Improper Control of Filename f... 🟡 CVE-2025-39457: Missing Authorization vulnerab... 🟡 CVE-2025-39456: Missing Authorization vulnerab... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39455: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39453: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39452: Improper Control of Filename f... 🟡 CVE-2025-39444: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39443: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39442: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39441: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39440: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39439: Exposure of Sensitive System I... 🟡 CVE-2025-39438: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39437: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🔥 CVE-2025-39436: Unrestricted Upload of File wi... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39435: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39434: Authorization Bypass Through U... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39433: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39432: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39431: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39430: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39429: Improper Control of Filename f... 🟡 CVE-2025-39428: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39427: Improper Neutralization of Inp... 🟡 CVE-2025-39426: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... 🟡 CVE-2025-39425: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39424: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39423: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39422: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39421: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39420: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39419: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39418: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39417: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39416: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39415: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-39414: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CS... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32686: Deserialization of Untrusted D... 🔥 CVE-2025-32682: Unrestricted Upload of File wi... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32674: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32670: Improper Neutralization of Inp... ⚠️ CVE-2025-32666: Improper Neutralization of Inp...
Vulnerability in Google's OAuth Workflow Poses Security Risks

Vulnerability in Google's OAuth Workflow Poses Security Risks

A critical vulnerability has been identified in Google's OAuth 2.0 authentication system, commonly used in the "Sign in with Google" feature. This flaw allows individuals to create unauthorized Google accounts associated with corporate email domains, potentially granting them access to various third-party applications like Slack and Zoom, even after they have left the organization.

Understanding the Vulnerability

The issue arises from Google's allowance for users to register Google accounts using any email address, not limited to Gmail. By exploiting email aliases and sub-addressing (e.g., using "user+alias@company.com"), individuals can create Google accounts that appear to belong to a corporate domain. These accounts are not visible to corporate administrators and can be used to access services that rely on Google OAuth for authentication.

This loophole enables former employees or malicious actors to maintain or gain unauthorized access to corporate resources. Since these shadow accounts are not managed by the organization's Google Workspace, they can persist undetected, posing significant security risks.

Implications for Organizations

The primary concern is that offboarding processes may fail to revoke access to critical applications. Even after an employee's official corporate account is deactivated, these unmanaged Google accounts can still be used to log in to services integrated with Google OAuth. This undermines security protocols and exposes sensitive data to potential breaches.

Mitigation Strategies

To address this vulnerability, organizations are advised to:

  • Disable "Sign in with Google": Where possible, disable Google OAuth authentication and enforce alternative methods such as Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) for user authentication.
  • Implement Strict Access Controls: Use invite-only or LDAP group-based provisioning to ensure that only authorized users can access corporate applications.
  • Monitor for Unrecognized Accounts: Regularly audit user accounts and monitor for any unauthorized access, paying special attention to email aliases and sub-addresses.
  • Engage with Service Providers: Encourage third-party service providers to validate the hosted domain (HD) claim in OAuth tokens to ensure that only legitimate corporate accounts are granted access.

Conclusion

This vulnerability in Google's OAuth workflow highlights the need for organizations to re-evaluate their authentication mechanisms and offboarding procedures. By implementing stricter access controls and monitoring practices, companies can mitigate the risks associated with unauthorized access through unmanaged Google accounts.

References

Back to Posts