CVE-2026-62995

{
  "id": "CVE-2026-62995",
  "sourceIdentifier": "[email protected]",
  "published": "2026-07-29T19:16:50.837",
  "lastModified": "2026-10-24T13:10:00.147",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "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."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "joserfc es una biblioteca de Python que proporciona una implementación de varios estándares de Firma y Cifrado de Objetos JSON (JOSE). En las versiones 1.7.1 y anteriores, joserfc acepta JWTs con relleno final (==) que no cumplen con las especificaciones de JOSE. Esto conduce a la maleabilidad de los JWTs cuando son consumidos por joserfc. Dependiendo de esta aplicación, esto podría o no ser un problema. Esto podría conducir a la elusión de la revocación de tokens o la protección anti-repetición cuando se implementa como una lista de denegación de tokens o una lista de denegación de hashes de tokens. Tenga en cuenta que los JWS ECDSA son siempre maleables debido a la maleabilidad de las firmas ECDSA (primer caso de prueba en el código a continuación). Esto hace que un esquema que asume que los JWTs no son maleables sea frágil. Sin embargo, para otros esquemas de firmas (o MAC) podría tener sentido asumir la no maleabilidad del token. Este problema ha sido solucionado en la versión 1.7.2."
    }
  ],
  "affected": [
    {
      "source": "[email protected]",
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "vendor": "authlib",
          "product": "joserfc",
          "versions": [
            {
              "version": "< 1.7.2",
              "status": "affected"
            }
          ]
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV40": [
      {
        "source": "[email protected]",
        "type": "Secondary",
        "cvssData": {
          "version": "4.0",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
          "baseScore": 2.3,
          "baseSeverity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackRequirements": "PRESENT",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "vulnIntegrityImpact": "LOW",
          "vulnAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "subIntegrityImpact": "NONE",
          "subAvailabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "exploitMaturity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "confidentialityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "integrityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "availabilityRequirement": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackVector": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackComplexity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedAttackRequirements": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedPrivilegesRequired": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedUserInteraction": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubIntegrityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Safety": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Automatable": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "Recovery": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "valueDensity": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "vulnerabilityResponseEffort": "NOT_DEFINED",
          "providerUrgency": "NOT_DEFINED"
        }
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "timestamp": "2026-07-30T14:31:13.769464Z",
          "id": "CVE-2026-62995",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "yes"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "total"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "source": "[email protected]",
      "type": "Secondary",
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-345"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "references": [
    {
      "url": "https://github.com/authlib/joserfc/security/advisories/GHSA-5jhw-7jv7-qcqq",
      "source": "[email protected]"
    }
  ]
}