Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.83% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2024
CVE-2024-53861High confidence
Issuer field partial matches allowed in pyjwt
jpadilla · pyjwt
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-75C5-XW7C-P5PM ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
2.2LowCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Patch availableLow technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityLow→Operational priority:Medium, raised one band.upgradedsince 2 Dec 2024
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs jpadilla pyjwt and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
4 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | pyjwt | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | pyjwt | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | pyjwt | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | pyjwt | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
Open-source package ranges2 source-attributed ranges
These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.
| Ecosystem and package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPIpyjwt | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 2.10.0; fixed 2.10.1 | 2.10.1 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 10 Sep 2026 |
| pipPyJWT | = 2.10.0 | 2.10.1 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 2 Dec 2024 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
CVE-2024-53861 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitypyjwt: Issuer field partial matches allowed in pyjwt
The vendor explicitly states that these products are not affected by this CVE.
- openshift-lightspeed-tech-preview/lightspeed-service-api-rhel9.src as a component of OpenShift Lightspeed
- ansible-tower.src as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 1.2
- aap-cloud-metrics-collector-container as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- ansible-automation-platform-24/de-supported-rhel9 as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- ansible-automation-platform-24/ee-dellemc-openmanage-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- ansible-automation-platform-25/ansible-dev-tools-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- ansible-automation-platform-25/ee-supported-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- ansible-automation-platform-25/lightspeed-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- ansible-automation-platform-25/platform-resource-runner-rhel8 as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- automation-controller.src as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- python-pyjwt.src as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- python3.11-pyjwt.src as a component of Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2
- Summary
- A flaw was found in the pyJWT package. An incorrect string comparison is run for `iss` checking, which allows for partial matches. 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.
- Remediation
- No remediation text is recorded.
Low technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Patch available01
What, why and how
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.
What
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.
Why
The product compares two entities in a security-relevant context, but the comparison is incorrect.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.
What
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.
Why
The product compares two entities in a security-relevant context, but the comparison is incorrect.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with elevated privileges. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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 Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Incorrect Comparison → disrupt the affected service
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- High: elevated access 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-697 ↗
CWE-697: Incorrect Comparison. The product compares two entities in a security-relevant context, but the comparison is incorrect.
- 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:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:NCommon 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.PRHighPrivileges required: The attacker needs elevated or administrative privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited 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.
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
- pyjwt: = 2.10.0
- 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 29 Nov 2024 · Last source change 2 Dec 2024, 18:10 UTC · CWE-697 · Incorrect Comparison
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-3440
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
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.