Skip to content

Username Enumeration via Timing Oracle in BasicAuth Default Authorizer

Moderate
ReneWerner87 published GHSA-g5vh-55hw-rxm8 Jul 2, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/gofiber/fiber/v3 (Go)

Affected versions

<= 3.2.0

Patched versions

3.3.0

Description

Summary

The default Authorizer function in GoFiber's BasicAuth middleware uses short-circuit evaluation that skips password hash comparison for non-existent usernames. With bcrypt-hashed passwords (the primary use case), the timing difference between a valid and invalid username is approximately 1,000,000:1 (~100ms vs ~100ns), enabling reliable remote username enumeration.

Vulnerable Code

File: middleware/basicauth/config.go, lines 126-138

if cfg.Authorizer == nil {
    verifiers := make(map[string]func(string) bool, len(cfg.Users))
    for u, hpw := range cfg.Users {
        v, err := parseHashedPassword(hpw)
        if err != nil {
            panic(err)
        }
        verifiers[u] = v
    }
    cfg.Authorizer = func(user, pass string, _ fiber.Ctx) bool {
        verify, ok := verifiers[user]
        return ok && verify(pass)   // line 137: short-circuit skips verify() if user unknown
    }
}

Data Flow

  1. Attacker sends Authorization: Basic <base64(candidate:wrongpass)>
  2. BasicAuth middleware decodes credentials and calls cfg.Authorizer(user, pass, c)
  3. Map lookup verifiers[user] returns ok=false for non-existent users
  4. Go && short-circuit: false && verify(pass) returns immediately without calling verify()
  5. For valid users, verify(pass) executes bcrypt.CompareHashAndPassword() (line 167: ~100ms at default cost 10)
  6. Timing difference: ~100ns (invalid user) vs ~100ms (valid user) = 1,000,000:1 ratio

Timing comparison by hash type:

Hash Type Valid User Invalid User Ratio
bcrypt ($2) ~100 ms ~100 ns 1,000,000:1
SHA-512 ~1-5 us ~100 ns 10-50:1
SHA-256 ~1-5 us ~100 ns 10-50:1

Impact

  • Username enumeration: Attacker reliably determines which usernames exist by measuring response latency
  • Targeted brute force: After enumerating valid usernames, password brute force is focused only on real accounts
  • Account discovery: In applications where usernames are sensitive (internal tools, admin panels), leaking their existence is itself a security issue

Notes

  • Password hash comparisons themselves are timing-safe: subtle.ConstantTimeCompare is used correctly for SHA-256 (line 185), SHA-512 (line 176), and bcrypt uses its own constant-time comparison
  • The fix is to always execute a dummy hash comparison for unknown users: bcrypt.CompareHashAndPassword(dummyHash, []byte(pass)) and discard the result
  • This pattern matches CVE-2023-36456 (Authentik timing oracle) and similar findings in other auth libraries

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

CVE ID

CVE-2026-44332

Weaknesses

Observable Discrepancy

The product behaves differently or sends different responses under different circumstances in a way that is observable to an unauthorized actor, which exposes security-relevant information about the state of the product, such as whether a particular operation was successful or not. Learn more on MITRE.

Credits