ghsa-m732-5p4w-x69g
Vulnerability from github
Published
2025-10-22 15:21
Modified
2025-10-23 17:38
Summary
Hono Improper Authorization vulnerability
Details

Improper Authorization in Hono (JWT Audience Validation)

Hono’s JWT authentication middleware did not validate the aud (Audience) claim by default. As a result, applications using the middleware without an explicit audience check could accept tokens intended for other audiences, leading to potential cross-service access (token mix-up).

The issue is addressed by adding a new verification.aud configuration option to allow RFC 7519–compliant audience validation. This change is classified as a security hardening improvement, but the lack of validation can still be considered a vulnerability in deployments that rely on default JWT verification.

Recommended secure configuration

You can enable RFC 7519–compliant audience validation using the new verification.aud option:

```ts import { Hono } from 'hono' import { jwt } from 'hono/jwt'

const app = new Hono()

app.use( '/api/*', jwt({ secret: 'my-secret', verification: { // Require this API to only accept tokens with aud = 'service-a' aud: 'service-a', }, }) ) ```

Below is the original description by the reporter. For security reasons, it does not include PoC reproduction steps, as the vulnerability can be clearly understood from the technical description.


The original description by the reporter

Summary

Hono’s JWT Auth Middleware does not provide a built-in aud (Audience) verification option, which can cause confused-deputy / token-mix-up issues: an API may accept a valid token that was issued for a different audience (e.g., another service) when multiple services share the same issuer/keys. This can lead to unintended cross-service access. Hono’s docs list verification options for iss/nbf/iat/exp only, with no aud support; RFC 7519 requires that when an aud claim is present, tokens MUST be rejected unless the processing party identifies itself in that claim.

Note: This problem likely exists in the JWK/JWKS-based middleware as well (e.g., jwk / verifyWithJwks)

Details

  • The middleware’s verifyOptions enumerate only iss, nbf, iat, and exp; there is no aud option. The same omission appears in the JWT Helper’s “Payload Validation” list. Developers relying on the middleware for complete standards-aligned validation therefore won’t check audience by default.
  • Standards requirement: RFC 7519 §4.1.3 states that each principal intended to process the JWT MUST identify itself with a value in the aud claim; if it does not, the JWT MUST be rejected (when aud is present). Lack of a first-class aud check increases the risk that tokens issued for Service B are accepted by Service A.
  • Real-world effect: In deployments with a single IdP/JWKS and shared keys across multiple services, a token minted for one audience can be mistakenly accepted by another audience unless developers implement a custom audience check.
    • For example, with Google Identity (OIDC), iss is always https://accounts.google.com (shared across apps), but aud differs per application because it is that app’s OAuth client ID; therefore, an attacker can host a separate service that supports “Sign in with Google,” obtain a valid ID token (JWT) for the victim user, and—if your API does not verify aud—use that token to access your API with the victim’s privileges.

Impact

Type: Authentication/authorization weakness via token mix-up (confused-deputy).

Who is impacted: Any Hono user who: - shares an issuer/keys across multiple services (common with a single IdP/JWKS) - distinguishes tokens by intended recipient using aud.

What can happen: - Cross-service access: A token for Service B may be accepted by Service A. - Boundary erosion: ID tokens and access tokens, or separate API audiences, can be inadvertently intermixed. - This may causes unauthorized invocation of sensitive endpoints.

Recommended remediation: 1) Add verifyOptions.aud (string | string[] | RegExp) to the middleware and enforce RFC 7519 semantics: In verify method, if aud is present and does not match with specified audiences, reject. 2) Ensure equivalent aud handling exists in the JWK/JWKS flow (jwk middleware / verifyWithJwks) so users of external IdPs can enforce audience consistently.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "hono"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "1.1.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.10.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-62610"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-285"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2025-10-22T15:21:18Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-10-22T20:15:38Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Improper Authorization in Hono (JWT Audience Validation)\n\nHono\u2019s JWT authentication middleware did not validate the `aud` (Audience) claim by default. As a result, applications using the middleware without an explicit audience check could accept tokens intended for other audiences, leading to potential cross-service access (token mix-up).\n\nThe issue is addressed by adding a new `verification.aud` configuration option to allow RFC 7519\u2013compliant audience validation. This change is classified as a **security hardening improvement**, but the lack of validation can still be considered a vulnerability in deployments that rely on default JWT verification.\n\n### Recommended secure configuration\n\nYou can enable RFC 7519\u2013compliant audience validation using the new `verification.aud` option:\n\n```ts\nimport { Hono } from \u0027hono\u0027\nimport { jwt } from \u0027hono/jwt\u0027\n\nconst app = new Hono()\n\napp.use(\n  \u0027/api/*\u0027,\n  jwt({\n    secret: \u0027my-secret\u0027,\n    verification: {\n      // Require this API to only accept tokens with aud = \u0027service-a\u0027\n      aud: \u0027service-a\u0027,\n    },\n  })\n)\n```\n\nBelow is the original description by the reporter. For security reasons, it does not include PoC reproduction steps, as the vulnerability can be clearly understood from the technical description.\n\n---\n\n## The original description by the reporter\n\n### Summary\nHono\u2019s **JWT Auth Middleware does not provide a built-in `aud` (Audience) verification option**, which can cause **confused-deputy / token-mix-up** issues: an API may accept a valid token that was **issued for a different audience** (e.g., another service) when multiple services share the same issuer/keys. This can lead to unintended cross-service access. Hono\u2019s docs list verification options for `iss/nbf/iat/exp` only, with **no `aud` support**; RFC 7519 requires that when an `aud` claim is present, tokens **MUST** be rejected unless the processing party identifies itself in that claim.\n\n**Note:** This problem likely exists in the **JWK/JWKS-based middleware** as well (e.g., `jwk` / `verifyWithJwks`)\n\n### Details\n- The middleware\u2019s `verifyOptions` enumerate only `iss`, `nbf`, `iat`, and `exp`; there is **no `aud` option**. The same omission appears in the JWT Helper\u2019s \u201cPayload Validation\u201d list. Developers relying on the middleware for complete standards-aligned validation therefore won\u2019t check audience by default.\n- **Standards requirement:** RFC 7519 \u00a74.1.3 states that each principal intended to process the JWT **MUST** identify itself with a value in the `aud` claim; if it does not, the JWT **MUST** be rejected (when `aud` is present). Lack of a first-class `aud` check increases the risk that tokens issued for **Service B** are accepted by **Service A**.\n- **Real-world effect:** In deployments with a single IdP/JWKS and shared keys across multiple services, a token minted for one audience can be mistakenly accepted by another audience unless developers implement a custom audience check.\n    - For example, with Google Identity (OIDC), iss is always https://accounts.google.com (shared across apps), but aud differs per application because it is that app\u2019s OAuth client ID; therefore, an attacker can host a separate service that supports \u201cSign in with Google,\u201d obtain a valid ID token (JWT) for the victim user, and\u2014if your API does not verify aud\u2014use that token to access your API with the victim\u2019s privileges.\n\n### Impact\n**Type:** Authentication/authorization weakness via **token mix-up (confused-deputy)**.\n\n**Who is impacted:** Any Hono user who:\n- shares an issuer/keys across multiple services (common with a single IdP/JWKS)\n- distinguishes tokens by intended recipient using `aud`.\n\n**What can happen:**\n- **Cross-service access:** A token for *Service B* may be accepted by *Service A*.\n- **Boundary erosion:** ID tokens and access tokens, or separate API audiences, can be inadvertently intermixed.\n    - This may causes unauthorized invocation of sensitive endpoints.\n\n**Recommended remediation:**\n1) Add `verifyOptions.aud` (`string | string[] | RegExp`) to the middleware and enforce RFC 7519 semantics: In [verify method](https://github.com/honojs/hono/blob/db764c2f1d8a2905d66c78c41aa47e47d3a4165d/src/utils/jwt/jwt.ts#L99-L156), if `aud` is present and does not match with specified audiences, reject.\n2) Ensure equivalent `aud` handling exists in the JWK/JWKS flow (`jwk` middleware / `verifyWithJwks`) so users of external IdPs can enforce audience consistently.",
  "id": "GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g",
  "modified": "2025-10-23T17:38:34Z",
  "published": "2025-10-22T15:21:18Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/honojs/hono/security/advisories/GHSA-m732-5p4w-x69g"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62610"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/honojs/hono/commit/45ba3bf9e3dff8e4bd85d6b47d4b71c8d6c66bef"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/honojs/hono"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Hono Improper Authorization vulnerability"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.


Loading…

Loading…