BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2022
CVE-2022-23539High confidence

jsonwebtoken unrestricted key type could lead to legacy keys usage

auth0 · node-jsonwebtoken

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-8CF7-32GW-WR33 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

5.9MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Scheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • EPSS is 0.50% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs auth0 node-jsonwebtoken and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2022-7563

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionScheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

Versions `<=8.5.1` of `jsonwebtoken` library could be misconfigured so that legacy, insecure key types are used for signature verification. For example, DSA keys could be used with the RS256 algorithm. You are affected if you are using an algorithm and a key type other than a combination listed in the GitHub Security Advisory as unaffected. This issue has been fixed, please update to version 9.0.0. This version validates for asymmetric key type and algorithm combinations. Please refer to the above mentioned algorithm / key type combinations for the valid secure configuration. After updating to version 9.0.0, if you still intend to continue with signing or verifying tokens using invalid key type/algorithm value combinations, you’ll need to set the `allowInvalidAsymmetricKeyTypes` option to `true` in the `sign()` and/or `verify()` functions.

What

Versions `<=8.5.1` of `jsonwebtoken` library could be misconfigured so that legacy, insecure key types are used for signature verification. For example, DSA keys could be used with the RS256 algorithm. You are affected if you are using an algorithm and a key type other than a combination listed in the GitHub Security Advisory as unaffected. This issue has been fixed, please update to version 9.0.0. This version validates for asymmetric key type and algorithm combinations. Please refer to the above mentioned algorithm / key type combinations for the valid secure configuration. After updating to version 9.0.0, if you still intend to continue with signing or verifying tokens using invalid key type/algorithm value combinations, you’ll need to set the `allowInvalidAsymmetricKeyTypes` option to `true` in the `sign()` and/or `verify()` functions.

Why

The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

Versions `<=8.5.1` of `jsonwebtoken` library could be misconfigured so that legacy, insecure key types are used for signature verification. For example, DSA keys could be used with the RS256 algorithm. You are affected if you are using an algorithm and a key type other than a combination listed in the GitHub Security Advisory as unaffected. This issue has been fixed, please update to version 9.0.0. This version validates for asymmetric key type and algorithm combinations. Please refer to the above mentioned algorithm / key type combinations for the valid secure configuration. After updating to version 9.0.0, if you still intend to continue with signing or verifying tokens using invalid key type/algorithm value combinations, you’ll need to set the `allowInvalidAsymmetricKeyTypes` option to `true` in the `sign()` and/or `verify()` functions.

Why

The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-327 ↗

CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm. The product uses a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm or protocol.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
NetworkCWE-327
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2023-1295Red Hat OpenShift: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein entfernter, authentisierter Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Red Hat OpenShift ausnutzen, um Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen oder einen Denial of Service zu verursachen.

Official advisory ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2023-1208HCL BigFix: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein entfernter, anonymer oder authentisierter Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in HCL BigFix ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Zustand herbeizuführen oder Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen.

Official advisory ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2023-0218IBM Integration Bus: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein entfernter, authentisierter Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in IBM Integration Bus ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen oder Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20221228Security Bulletin 28 Dec 2022

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 28 Dec 2022, published on 28 December 2022. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2024-AVI-0366Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits IBM

d?id=CVE-2019-14322 Référence CVE CVE-2020-15366 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-15366 Référence CVE CVE-2020-25032 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-25032 Référence CVE CVE-2020-28493 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-28493 Référence CVE CVE-2021-28363 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-28363 Référence CVE CVE-2021-30465 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-30465 Référence CVE CVE-2021-43565 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-43565 Référence CVE CVE-2021-43784 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-43784 Référence CVE CVE-2021-45958 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-45958 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23539 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23539 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23540 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23540 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23541 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23541 Référence CVE CVE-2022-29162 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-29162 Référence CVE CVE-2022-31116 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-31116 Référence CVE CVE-2022-31117 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-31117 Référence CVE CVE-2022-40897 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-40897 Référence CVE CVE-2023-23934 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-23934 Référence CVE CVE-2023-25577 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2024-AVI-0145Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits IBM

org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2021-44716 Référence CVE CVE-2022-0778 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-0778 Référence CVE CVE-2022-1292 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-1292 Référence CVE CVE-2022-1705 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-1705 Référence CVE CVE-2022-1962 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-1962 Référence CVE CVE-2022-2068 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-2068 Référence CVE CVE-2022-2097 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-2097 Référence CVE CVE-2022-22576 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-22576 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23529 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23529 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23539 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23539 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23540 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23540 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23541 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23541 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23772 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23772 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23773 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23773 Référence CVE CVE-2022-23806 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-23806 Référence CVE CVE-2022-24675 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-24675 Référence CVE CVE-2022-24921 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-24921 Référence CVE CVE-2022-24999 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2022-003298jsonwebtoken ライブラリにおける暗号アルゴリズムの使用に関する脆弱性

jsonwebtoken ライブラリには、暗号アルゴリズムの使用に関する脆弱性が存在します。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
node-jsonwebtoken: <= 8.5.1
Fixed
An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 22 Dec 2022 · Last source change 15 Apr 2025, 13:31 UTC · CWE-327 · Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-7563
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2022-23539 · cve.blacktree.nl