FKIE_CVE-2026-45363
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-07-14 22:16 - Updated: 2026-07-15 14:18
Severity
Summary
ruby-jwt is a Ruby implementation of the RFC 7519 OAuth JSON Web Token standard. Prior to 2.10.3 and 3.2.0, JWT.decode(token, '', true, algorithm: 'HS256') accepts an attacker-forged token because OpenSSL::HMAC.digest('SHA256', '', payload) returns a valid digest under an empty key and no empty-key precondition exists in the HMAC algorithm. The same path is reached when a keyfinder block or key_finder: argument returns an empty string, nil, or an array containing nil for an unknown key, affecting HS256, HS384, and HS512 verification through JWT.decode and JWT::EncodedToken#verify_signature!. This issue is fixed in versions 2.10.3 and 3.2.0.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version |
|---|
{
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"product": "ruby-jwt",
"vendor": "jwt",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003c 2.10.3"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "\u003e= 3.0.0, \u003c 3.2.0"
}
]
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "ruby-jwt is a Ruby implementation of the RFC 7519 OAuth JSON Web Token standard. Prior to 2.10.3 and 3.2.0, JWT.decode(token, \u0027\u0027, true, algorithm: \u0027HS256\u0027) accepts an attacker-forged token because OpenSSL::HMAC.digest(\u0027SHA256\u0027, \u0027\u0027, payload) returns a valid digest under an empty key and no empty-key precondition exists in the HMAC algorithm. The same path is reached when a keyfinder block or key_finder: argument returns an empty string, nil, or an array containing nil for an unknown key, affecting HS256, HS384, and HS512 verification through JWT.decode and JWT::EncodedToken#verify_signature!. This issue is fixed in versions 2.10.3 and 3.2.0."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-45363",
"lastModified": "2026-07-15T14:18:11.470",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "NONE",
"baseScore": 9.1,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 5.2,
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
],
"ssvcV203": [
{
"source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"ssvcData": {
"id": "CVE-2026-45363",
"options": [
{
"exploitation": "none"
},
{
"automatable": "yes"
},
{
"technicalImpact": "total"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-07-15T13:24:12.081532Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
}
}
]
},
"published": "2026-07-14T22:16:54.463",
"references": [
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/jwt/ruby-jwt/commit/9820020869ad147b941e49d96ab8beba35532964"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/jwt/ruby-jwt/commit/db560b769a07bd9724e77ff505011ac01872106f"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/jwt/ruby-jwt/releases/tag/v2.10.3"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/jwt/ruby-jwt/releases/tag/v3.2.0"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"url": "https://github.com/jwt/ruby-jwt/security/advisories/GHSA-c32j-vqhx-rx3x"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
"vulnStatus": "Received",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-287"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-326"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-1391"
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
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.
Loading…
Loading…