Baitaphish
Security intelligence
SearchLatest briefing
CVE Explorer

CVE-2026-67330

@better-auth/scim (a better-auth plugin) versions >= 1.4.0-beta.27 through <= 1.6.21 and >= 1.7.0-beta.0 through <= 1.7.0-beta.9 contain an authorization bypass. SCIM token issuance did not reject provider IDs already used by existing SSO, SAML, OIDC, generic OAuth, or social account providers, and the same logical provider ID was used for both SCIM provider configuration and account ownership. An authenticated user could mint a SCIM token whose provider ID collided with an existing provider nam
Lifecycle PUBLISHED1 preserved revisionFact urn:baitaphish:canonical-cve-fact-revision:v2:a41ff04823a083ae5b252b929bcf8567aa9046fca27c3067ec5c3a22b3756181
Known exploited
Not asserted
Disputed
No
Stale source
No
Conflicts
2

Preserved source conflicts

No provider value was silently selected as the winner.

affected · 2 assertions

{"defaultStatus":"unaffected","packageURL":"pkg:npm/better-auth/scim","product":"scim","vendor":"better-auth","versions":[{"lessThan":"*","status":"affected","version":"1.7.0-beta.0","versionType":"semver"}]}

  • cve_program_cvelist_v5affected
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/affected/1

{"defaultStatus":"unaffected","packageURL":"pkg:npm/better-auth/scim","product":"scim","vendor":"better-auth","versions":[{"lessThan":"*","status":"affected","version":"1.4.0-beta.27","versionType":"semver"}]}

  • cve_program_cvelist_v5affected
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/affected/0
cvss · 2 assertions

{"metric":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"HIGH","baseScore":9.9,"baseSeverity":"CRITICAL","confidentialityImpact":"HIGH","integrityImpact":"HIGH","privilegesRequired":"LOW","scope":"CHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H","version":"3.1"},"metric_type":"cvssV3_1"}

  • cve_program_cvelist_v5cvss
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/metrics/1/cvssV3_1

{"metric":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackRequirements":"NONE","attackVector":"NETWORK","baseScore":9.4,"baseSeverity":"CRITICAL","privilegesRequired":"LOW","subAvailabilityImpact":"HIGH","subConfidentialityImpact":"HIGH","subIntegrityImpact":"HIGH","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H","version":"4.0","vulnAvailabilityImpact":"HIGH","vulnConfidentialityImpact":"HIGH","vulnIntegrityImpact":"HIGH"},"metric_type":"cvssV4_0"}

  • cve_program_cvelist_v5cvss
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/metrics/0/cvssV4_0

Affected products and versions

2 source assertions
{"defaultStatus":"unaffected","packageURL":"pkg:npm/better-auth/scim","product":"scim","vendor":"better-auth","versions":[{"lessThan":"*","status":"affected","version":"1.7.0-beta.0","versionType":"semver"}]}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5affected
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/affected/1
{"defaultStatus":"unaffected","packageURL":"pkg:npm/better-auth/scim","product":"scim","vendor":"better-auth","versions":[{"lessThan":"*","status":"affected","version":"1.4.0-beta.27","versionType":"semver"}]}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5affected
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/affected/0

Provider-owned CVSS observations

2 source assertions
{"metric":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"HIGH","baseScore":9.9,"baseSeverity":"CRITICAL","confidentialityImpact":"HIGH","integrityImpact":"HIGH","privilegesRequired":"LOW","scope":"CHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H","version":"3.1"},"metric_type":"cvssV3_1"}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5cvss
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/metrics/1/cvssV3_1
{"metric":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackRequirements":"NONE","attackVector":"NETWORK","baseScore":9.4,"baseSeverity":"CRITICAL","privilegesRequired":"LOW","subAvailabilityImpact":"HIGH","subConfidentialityImpact":"HIGH","subIntegrityImpact":"HIGH","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H","version":"4.0","vulnAvailabilityImpact":"HIGH","vulnConfidentialityImpact":"HIGH","vulnIntegrityImpact":"HIGH"},"metric_type":"cvssV4_0"}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5cvss
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/metrics/0/cvssV4_0

CWE assertions

1 source assertion
{"cweId":"CWE-20","description":"Improper Input Validation","lang":"en","type":"CWE"}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5cwe
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/problemTypes/0/descriptions/0

Source references

2 source assertions
{"name":"GitHub Security Advisory (GHSA-rjg6-39jm-rgg4)","tags":["vendor-advisory"],"url":"https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/security/advisories/GHSA-rjg6-39jm-rgg4"}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5reference
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/references/0
{"name":"VulnCheck Advisory: better-auth SCIM 1.4.0-beta.27 through 1.6.21 Account Takeover via Provider-ID Collision","tags":["third-party-advisory"],"url":"https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/better-auth-scim-beta-27-through-account-takeover-via-provider-id-collision"}
  • cve_program_cvelist_v5reference
    urn:baitaphish:normalized-source-record:v2:93e599a5d4fee77b57d530e85b13d429b096a8bed1e8f897cead3721f655aeeb · sha256:36c9f268b5967154… · /containers/cna/references/1

Attribution and limitations

  • CVE Program CVEList V5: Reproduce the MITRE copyright designation and CVE license in copies. Source →

Provider severity values are preserved separately. Baitaphish does not convert them into a risk rating, infer affected products, or treat EPSS as observed exploitation.

← Back to CVE Explorer