Escape client_id in OAuth consent advanced details#3418
Merged
Conversation
🤖 Generated with GPT-5.2-Codex
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
client_idraw in the advanced details section, reintroducing an XSS regression when attacker-controlled client IDs are present; this change restores consistent escaping for user-controlled fields.Description
client_idbefore rendering the "Application ID" detail increate_consent_htmlso all advanced detail values are HTML-escaped (file:src/fastmcp/server/auth/oauth_proxy/ui.py).TestConsentPageRendering::test_create_consent_html_escapes_client_id_in_detailsthat verifies a maliciousclient_idis not rendered as raw HTML (file:tests/server/auth/oauth_proxy/test_ui.py).Testing
uv syncwhich completed successfully.uv run pytest -n auto, which exposed unrelated flaky/timeouts in this environment but was used to validate the PR initially; the failures were not related to the UI change.uv run pytest tests/server/auth/oauth_proxy/test_ui.py tests/server/auth/test_oauth_consent_page.pyand they passed (18 passed in ~3.3s).uv run prek run --all-fileswhich failed due to an external pre-commit hook fetch failing in the environment (CONNECT tunnel failed, response 403).🤖 Generated with GPT-5.2-Codex
Codex Task