Nixpkgs security tracker

Login with GitHub
⚠️ You are using a production deployment that is still only suitable for demo purposes. Any work done in this might be wiped later without notice.

Suggestions search

With package: python313Packages.joserfc

Found 4 matching suggestions

View:
Compact
Detailed
Untriaged
Permalink CVE-2026-75509
6.5 MEDIUM
  • CVSS version (CVSS): 3.1
  • Attack Vector (AV): Network (N)
  • Attack Complexity (AC): High (H)
  • Privileges Required (PR): None (N)
  • User Interaction (UI): None (N)
  • Scope (S): Unchanged (U)
  • Confidentiality (C): Low (L)
  • Integrity (I): High (H)
  • Availability (A): None (N)
  • Modified Attack Vector (MAV): Network (N)
  • Modified Attack Complexity (MAC): High (H)
  • Modified Privileges Required (MPR): None (N)
  • Modified User Interaction (MUI): None (N)
  • Modified Confidentiality (MC): Low (L)
  • Modified Scope (MS): Unchanged (U)
  • Modified Integrity (MI): High (H)
  • Modified Availability (MA): None (N)
created 5 days, 5 hours ago Activity log
  • Created suggestion
joserfc claim-validation bypass via array-typed single-string claims (iss/sub/jti)

joserfc is a Python library that provides an implementation of several JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) standards. Prior to version 1.7.3, JWTClaimsRegistry applies membership matching to list-valued iss and sub claims, allowing an array-valued iss that contains the expected issuer to pass an intended equality check and enabling issuer-validation bypass. This issue is fixed in version 1.7.3.

Affected products

joserfc
  • ==< 1.7.3

Matching in nixpkgs

Untriaged
Permalink CVE-2026-62995
2.3 LOW
  • CVSS version (CVSS): 4.0
  • Attack Vector (AV): Network (N)
  • Attack Complexity (AC): Low (L)
  • Attack Requirement (AT): Present (P)
  • Privileges Required (PR): Low (L)
  • User Interaction (UI): None (N)
  • Vulnerable System Impact Confidentiality (VC): None (N)
  • Vulnerable System Impact Integrity (VI): Low (L)
  • Vulnerable System Impact Availability (VA): None (N)
  • Subsequent System Impact Confidentiality (SC): None (N)
  • Subsequent System Impact Integrity (SI): None (N)
  • Subsequent System Impact Availability (SA): None (N)
  • Modified Attack Vector (MAV): Network (N)
  • Modified Attack Complexity (MAC): Low (L)
  • Modified Attack Requirement (MAT): Present (P)
  • Modified Privileges Required (MPR): Low (L)
  • Modified User Interaction (MUI): None (N)
  • Modified Vulnerable System Impact Confidentiality (MVC): None (N)
  • Modified Vulnerable System Impact Integrity (MVI): Low (L)
  • Modified Vulnerable System Impact Availability (MVA): None (N)
  • Modified Subsequent System Impact Confidentiality (MSC): Negligible (N)
  • Modified Subsequent System Impact Integrity (MSI): Negligible (N)
  • Modified Subsequent System Impact Availability (MSA): Negligible (N)
  • Safety (S): Not Defined (X)
  • Automatable (AU): Not Defined (X)
  • Recovery (R): Not Defined (X)
  • Value Density (V): Not Defined (X)
  • Vulnerability Response Effort (RE): Not Defined (X)
  • Provider Urgency (U): Not Defined (X)
  • Confidentiality Req. (CR): Not Defined (X)
  • Integrity Req. (IR): Not Defined (X)
  • Availability Req. (AR): Not Defined (X)
  • Exploit Maturity (E): Not Defined (X)
created 1 month ago Activity log
  • Created suggestion
joserfc accepts JWT with padding, leading to JWT malleability

joserfc is a Python library that provides an implementation of several JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) standards. in versions 1.7.1 and prior, joserfc accepts JWTs with trailing padding (==) which are not conforming to the JOSE specifications. This leads to malleability of the JWTs when consumed by joserfc. Depending on this application this might or not be an issue. This could lead to bypass of token revocation or anti-replay protection when implemented as a deny list of tokens or a deny list of token hashes. Note that ECDSA JWS are always malleable because of the malleability of ECDSA signatures (first test case in the code bellow). This makes a scheme which assumes that JWTs are not malleable brittle. However for other signatures (or MAC) schemes it might make sense to assume non malleability of the token. This issue has been fixed in version 1.7.2.

Affected products

joserfc
  • ==< 1.7.2

Matching in nixpkgs

Untriaged
Permalink CVE-2026-49852
8.7 HIGH
  • CVSS version (CVSS): 4.0
  • Attack Vector (AV): Network (N)
  • Attack Complexity (AC): Low (L)
  • Attack Requirement (AT): None (N)
  • Privileges Required (PR): None (N)
  • User Interaction (UI): None (N)
  • Vulnerable System Impact Confidentiality (VC): None (N)
  • Vulnerable System Impact Integrity (VI): High (H)
  • Vulnerable System Impact Availability (VA): None (N)
  • Subsequent System Impact Confidentiality (SC): None (N)
  • Subsequent System Impact Integrity (SI): None (N)
  • Subsequent System Impact Availability (SA): None (N)
  • Modified Attack Vector (MAV): Network (N)
  • Modified Attack Complexity (MAC): Low (L)
  • Modified Attack Requirement (MAT): None (N)
  • Modified Privileges Required (MPR): None (N)
  • Modified User Interaction (MUI): None (N)
  • Modified Vulnerable System Impact Confidentiality (MVC): None (N)
  • Modified Vulnerable System Impact Integrity (MVI): High (H)
  • Modified Vulnerable System Impact Availability (MVA): None (N)
  • Modified Subsequent System Impact Confidentiality (MSC): Negligible (N)
  • Modified Subsequent System Impact Integrity (MSI): Negligible (N)
  • Modified Subsequent System Impact Availability (MSA): Negligible (N)
  • Safety (S): Not Defined (X)
  • Automatable (AU): Not Defined (X)
  • Recovery (R): Not Defined (X)
  • Value Density (V): Not Defined (X)
  • Vulnerability Response Effort (RE): Not Defined (X)
  • Provider Urgency (U): Not Defined (X)
  • Confidentiality Req. (CR): Not Defined (X)
  • Integrity Req. (IR): Not Defined (X)
  • Availability Req. (AR): Not Defined (X)
  • Exploit Maturity (E): Not Defined (X)
created 1 month, 1 week ago Activity log
  • Created suggestion
joserfc: HS256/HS384/HS512 verify accepts empty/nil HMAC key (cross-language sibling of CVE-2026-45363)

joserfc is a Python library that provides an implementation of several JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) standards. Prior to 1.6.8, joserfc.jwt.decode accepts attacker-forged HMAC-signed tokens when the caller-supplied verification key is the empty string or None, because HMACAlgorithm.sign and HMACAlgorithm.verify in src/joserfc/_rfc7518/jws_algs.py pass the output of OctKey.get_op_key(...) to hmac.new(...) and OctKey.import_key in src/joserfc/_rfc7518/oct_key.py only emits a SecurityWarning for keys shorter than 14 bytes without rejecting zero-length input. This issue is fixed in version 1.6.8.

Affected products

joserfc
  • ==< 1.6.8

Matching in nixpkgs

Untriaged
Permalink CVE-2026-48990
5.3 MEDIUM
  • CVSS version (CVSS): 3.1
  • Attack Vector (AV): Network (N)
  • Attack Complexity (AC): Low (L)
  • Privileges Required (PR): None (N)
  • User Interaction (UI): None (N)
  • Scope (S): Unchanged (U)
  • Confidentiality (C): None (N)
  • Integrity (I): None (N)
  • Availability (A): Low (L)
  • Modified Attack Vector (MAV): Network (N)
  • Modified Attack Complexity (MAC): Low (L)
  • Modified Privileges Required (MPR): None (N)
  • Modified User Interaction (MUI): None (N)
  • Modified Confidentiality (MC): None (N)
  • Modified Scope (MS): Unchanged (U)
  • Modified Integrity (MI): None (N)
  • Modified Availability (MA): Low (L)
created 2 months, 1 week ago Activity log
  • Created suggestion
joserfc: b64=false RFC7797 JWS payloads bypass JWSRegistry payload-size limits during deserialization

joserfc is a Python library that provides an implementation of several JSON Object Signing and Encryption (JOSE) standards. In versions 1.3.4 through 1.6.5, joserfc accepts oversized RFC7797 b64=false JWS payloads without applying JWSRegistry.max_payload_length, which can lead to resource exhaustion. The normal JWS compact and flattened JSON paths reject payloads above the configured payload-size limit with ExceededSizeError. The RFC7797 unencoded payload paths do not make the same check. A valid b64=false compact or flattened JSON JWS can therefore deserialize successfully with a payload larger than JWSRegistry.max_payload_length. Applications that accept lower-trust JWS values and rely on joserfc to reject oversized token content during verification have a moderate availability risk. This issue has been fixed in version 1.6.7.

Affected products

joserfc
  • ==< 1.6.7

Matching in nixpkgs