Skip to content

JWT Algorithm Confusion

Moderate
simoneb published GHSA-c2ff-88x2-x9pg Nov 20, 2023

Package

npm fast-jwt (npm)

Affected versions

< 3.3.1

Patched versions

3.3.2

Description

Summary

The fast-jwt library does not properly prevent JWT algorithm confusion for all public key types.

Details

The 'publicKeyPemMatcher' in 'fast-jwt/src/crypto.js' does not properly match all common PEM formats for public keys. To exploit this vulnerability, an attacker needs to craft a malicious JWT token containing the HS256 algorithm, signed with the public RSA key of the victim application. This attack will only work if the victim application utilizes a public key containing the BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY header.

PoC

Take a server running the following code:

const express = require('express');
const { createSigner, createVerifier } = require('fast-jwt')
const fs = require('fs');
const path = require('path');

const app = express();
const port = 3000;

// Load the keys from the file
const publicKeyPath = path.join(__dirname, 'public_key.pem');
const publicKey = fs.readFileSync(publicKeyPath, 'utf8');
const privateKeyPath = path.join(__dirname, 'key');
const privateKey = fs.readFileSync(privateKeyPath, 'utf8');

app.use(express.json());

// Endpoint to generate a JWT token with admin: False
app.get('/generateToken', async (req, res) => {
  const payload = { admin: false, name: req.query.name };

  const signSync = createSigner({ algorithm: 'RS256', key: privateKey });
  const token = signSync(payload);
  
  res.json({ token });
});

// Middleware to verify the JWT token
function verifyToken(req, res, next) {
  const token = req.query.token;

  const verifySync = createVerifier({ key: publicKey });
  const payload = verifySync(token);

  req.decoded = payload;
  next();
}

// Endpoint to check if you are the admin or not
app.get('/checkAdmin', verifyToken, (req, res) => {
  res.json(req.decoded);
});

app.listen(port, () => {
  console.log(`Server is running on port ${port}`);
});

Assume the server generated their keys like follows:

ssh-keygen -t rsa -b 2048 -m PEM
ssh-keygen -f key.pub -e -m PEM > public_key.pem

Public key recovery
First, an attacker needs to recover the public key from the server in any way possible. It is possible to extract this from just two JWT tokens as shown below.
Grab two different JWT tokens and utilize the following tool: https://github.com/silentsignal/rsa_sign2n/blob/release/standalone/jwt_forgery.py

python3 jwt_forgery.py token1 token2

The tool will generate 4 different public keys, all in different formats. Try the following for all 4 formats.

Algorithm confusion
Change the JWT to the HS256 algorithm and modify any of the contents to your liking at https://jwt.io/.
Copy the resulting JWT token and use with the following tool: https://github.com/ticarpi/jwt_tool

python /opt/jwt_tool/jwt_tool.py --exploit k -pk public_key token

You will now get a resulting JWT token that is validly signed.

Impact

Applications using the RS256 algorithm, a public key with a BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY header, and calling the verify function without explicitly providing an algorithm, are vulnerable to this algorithm confusion attack which allows attackers to sign arbitrary payloads which will be accepted by the verifier.

Solution

Change https://github.com/nearform/fast-jwt/blob/master/src/crypto.js#L29

const publicKeyPemMatcher = '-----BEGIN PUBLIC KEY-----'

to be regex:

const publicKeyPemMatcher = /^-----BEGIN( RSA)? PUBLIC KEY-----/

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

CVE ID

CVE-2023-48223

Weaknesses

Credits