Summary
Privilege escalation in Strongbox
Workarounds
None
References
Impact
An attacker with read-only access to a Strongbox secret could craft a valid encrypted secret (same id/version). It also makes the audit logs from KMS less useful. The issue is caused by a bug in the underlying AWS Encryption SDK.
By default, the encrypted secrets are stored in DynamoDB and an attacker with read-only access would not be able to write the encrypted secret to DynamoDB. So in practice the impact should be limited for most users.
Strongbox supports storing data in files as an alternative to DynamoDB. If the attacker had write access to where the files are stored they could make the attack work end-to-end. Similarly, any custom storage backend could also be affected.
In order to be backwards compatible Strongbox will not make use of key commitments (another improvement to the AWS Encryption SDK). Strongbox enforces that only one KMS key can be used, and it must match the expected one. This means that an attacker needs write access to both KMS and DynamoDB (or other storage backend) to stage an attack, which is not a scenario Strongbox is designed to protect against.
The application assigns, modifies, tracks, or checks privileges incorrectly, allowing a user to gain elevated access. Typical impact: privilege escalation beyond the intended level.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Fixed in version 0.5.0.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC? GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC is a medium-severity improper privilege management vulnerability in com.schibsted.security:strongbox-sdk (maven), affecting versions < 0.5.0. It is fixed in 0.5.0. The application assigns, modifies, tracks, or checks privileges incorrectly, allowing a user to gain elevated access.
- Which versions of com.schibsted.security:strongbox-sdk are affected by GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC? com.schibsted.security:strongbox-sdk (maven) versions < 0.5.0 is affected.
- Is there a fix for GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC? Yes. GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC is fixed in 0.5.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix GHSA-MHGM-52VG-PVVC? Upgrade
com.schibsted.security:strongbox-sdkto 0.5.0 or later.