FKIE_CVE-2024-53861

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2024-11-29 19:15 - Updated: 2026-06-17 08:09
Severity
2.2 (Low) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
7.5 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Summary
pyjwt is a JSON Web Token implementation in Python. An incorrect string comparison is run for `iss` checking, resulting in `"acb"` being accepted for `"_abc_"`. This is a bug introduced in version 2.10.0: checking the "iss" claim changed from `isinstance(issuer, list)` to `isinstance(issuer, Sequence)`. Since str is a Sequnce, but not a list, `in` is also used for string comparison. This results in `if "abc" not in "__abcd__":` being checked instead of `if "abc" != "__abc__":`. Signature checks are still present so real world impact is likely limited to denial of service scenarios. This issue has been patched in version 2.10.1. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
References
security-advisories@github.comhttps://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/1570e708672aa9036bc772476beae8bfa48f4131#diff-6893ad4a1c5a36b8af3028db8c8bc3b62418149843fc382faf901eaab008e380R366Patch
security-advisories@github.comhttps://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/33022c25525c1020869c71ce2a4109e44ae4ced1Patch
security-advisories@github.comhttps://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-75c5-xw7c-p5pmExploit, Vendor Advisory
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
pyjwt_project pyjwt 2.10.0
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "product": "pyjwt",
          "vendor": "jpadilla",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "= 2.10.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security-advisories@github.com"
    },
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "cpes": [
            "cpe:2.3:a:pyjwt_project:pyjwt:2.10.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*"
          ],
          "defaultStatus": "unknown",
          "product": "pyjwt",
          "vendor": "pyjwt_project",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "2.10.0"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0"
    }
  ],
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:pyjwt_project:pyjwt:2.10.0:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "969521B6-ABE6-4B43-A063-56C58904F8ED",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "pyjwt is a JSON Web Token implementation in Python. An incorrect string comparison is run for `iss` checking, resulting in `\"acb\"` being accepted for `\"_abc_\"`. This is a bug introduced in version 2.10.0: checking the \"iss\" claim changed from `isinstance(issuer, list)` to `isinstance(issuer, Sequence)`. Since str is a Sequnce, but not a list, `in` is also used for string comparison. This results in `if \"abc\" not in \"__abcd__\":` being checked instead of `if \"abc\" != \"__abc__\":`. Signature checks are still present so real world impact is likely limited to denial of service scenarios. This issue has been patched in version 2.10.1. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "pyjwt es una implementaci\u00f3n de JSON Web Token en Python. Se ejecuta una comparaci\u00f3n de cadena incorrecta para la comprobaci\u00f3n de `iss`, lo que da como resultado que `\"acb\"` se acepte en lugar de `\"_abc_\"`. Este es un error introducido en la versi\u00f3n 2.10.0: la comprobaci\u00f3n de la reclamaci\u00f3n \"iss\" cambi\u00f3 de `isinstance(issuer, list)` a `isinstance(issuer, Sequence)`. Dado que str es una secuencia, pero no una lista, `in` tambi\u00e9n se utiliza para la comparaci\u00f3n de cadenas. Esto da como resultado que se compruebe `if \"abc\" not in \"__abcd__\":` en lugar de `if \"abc\" != \"__abc__\":`. Las comprobaciones de firma a\u00fan est\u00e1n presentes, por lo que es probable que el impacto en el mundo real se limite a escenarios de denegaci\u00f3n de servicio. Este problema se ha corregido en la versi\u00f3n 2.10.1. Se recomienda a todos los usuarios que actualicen. No existen workarounds conocidos para esta vulnerabilidad."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2024-53861",
  "lastModified": "2026-06-17T08:09:25.893",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 2.2,
          "baseSeverity": "LOW",
          "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "integrityImpact": "LOW",
          "privilegesRequired": "HIGH",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 0.7,
        "impactScore": 1.4,
        "source": "security-advisories@github.com",
        "type": "Secondary"
      },
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "baseScore": 7.5,
          "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
          "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
        "impactScore": 3.6,
        "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
        "type": "Primary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2024-53861",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "poc"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2024-12-02T11:10:51.855024Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2024-11-29T19:15:09.433",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security-advisories@github.com",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/1570e708672aa9036bc772476beae8bfa48f4131#diff-6893ad4a1c5a36b8af3028db8c8bc3b62418149843fc382faf901eaab008e380R366"
    },
    {
      "source": "security-advisories@github.com",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/commit/33022c25525c1020869c71ce2a4109e44ae4ced1"
    },
    {
      "source": "security-advisories@github.com",
      "tags": [
        "Exploit",
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/jpadilla/pyjwt/security/advisories/GHSA-75c5-xw7c-p5pm"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-697"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security-advisories@github.com",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

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.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.