GHSA-9ggr-2464-2j32: Authlib: JWS/JWT accepts unknown crit headers (RFC violation → possible authz bypass)
SummaryAuthlib’s JWS verification accepts tokens that declare unknown critical header parameters (`crit`), violating RFC 7515 “must‑understand” semantics. An attacker can craft a signed token with a critical header (for example, `bork` or `cnf`) that strict verifiers reject but Authlib accepts. In mixed‑language fleets, this enables split‑brain verification and can lead to policy bypass, replay, or privilege escalation.Affected Component and VersionsLibrary: Authlib (JWS verification)API: `authlib.jose.JsonWebSignature.deserialize_compact(...)`Version tested: 1.6.3Configuration: Default; no allowlist or special handling for `crit`DetailsRFC 7515 (JWS) §4.1.11 defines `crit` as a “must‑understand” list: recipients MUST understand and enforce every header parameter listed in `crit`, otherwise they MUST reject the token. Security‑sensitive semantics such as token binding (e.g., `cnf` from RFC 7800) are often conveyed via `crit`.Observed behavior with Authlib 1.6.3:When a compact JWS contains a protected header with `crit: ["cnf"]` and a `cnf` object, or `crit: ["bork"]` with an unknown parameter, Authlib verifies the signature and returns the payload without rejecting the token or enforcing semantics of the critical parameter.By contrast, Java Nimbus JOSE+JWT (9.37.x) and Node `jose` v5 both reject such tokens by default when `crit` lists unknown names.Impact in heterogeneous fleets:A strict ingress/gateway (Nimbus/Node) rejects a token, but a lenient Python microservice (Authlib) accepts the same token. This split‑brain acceptance bypasses intended security policies and can enable replay or privilege escalation if `crit` carries binding or policy information.Proof of Concept (PoC)This repository provides a multi‑runtime PoC demonstrating the issue across Python (Authlib), Node (`jose` v5), and Java (Nimbus).PrerequisitesPython 3.8+Node.js 18+Java 11+ with MavenSetupEnter the directory **authlib-crit-bypass-poc** & run following commands.Tokens minted`tokens/unknown_crit.jwt` with protected header:
`{ "alg": "HS256", "crit": ["bork"], "bork": "x" }``tokens/cnf_header.jwt` with protected header:
`{ "alg": "HS256", "crit": ["cnf"], "cnf": {"jkt": "thumb-42"} }`ReproductionRun the cross‑runtime demo:Expected output for each token (strict verifiers reject; Authlib accepts):For `tokens/unknown_crit.jwt`:For `tokens/cnf_header.jwt`:Environment notes:Authlib version used: `1.6.3` (from PyPI)Node `jose` version: `^5`Nimbus JOSE+JWT version: `9.37.x`HS256 secret is 32 bytes to satisfy strict verifiers: `0123456789abcdef0123456789abcdef`ImpactClass: Violation of JWS `crit` “must‑understand” semantics; specification non‑compliance leading to authentication/authorization policy bypass.Who is impacted: Any service that relies on `crit` to carry mandatory security semantics (e.g., token binding via `cnf`) or operates in a heterogeneous fleet with strict verifiers elsewhere.Consequences: Split‑brain acceptance (gateway rejects while a backend accepts), replay, or privilege escalation if critical semantics are ignored.ReferencesRFC 7515: JSON Web Signature (JWS), §4.1.11 `crit`RFC 7800: Proof‑of‑Possession Key Semantics for JWTs (`cnf`)
CVSS v3.1: 7.5